CHAPTER 43 NATIONALISM Nationalism is a two-edged sword. Many crimes have been committed in the name of nationalism. Many good deeds have also been prompted by it. This means that as an instrument it can be put to good as well as bad uses. What nationalism would achieve would greatly depend upon its user—his motivations and goals. Nationalism is a powerful force, but it is relatively of recent origin. It took a concrete shape mostly in the 18th century, and its potential power was experienced in the 20th century. The outbreak of the First World War and that of the Second World War showed that nationalism was capable of vigorously mobilising people for perceived causes of the nation. Before we define nationalism, we may try to understand two related concepts, namely, nation and nationality. Nation and nationality are derived from the same word ‘natio’, meaning birth. But there is a significant difference between them. Nationality is primharily a spiritual and psychological concept. It refers to a group of people, ordinarily living in a geographical unit, and having some strong common ties. These people share a common feeling and attitude which may have evolved over a period of time. A. Zimmem has observed, “Nationality, like religion, is subjective; psychological; a condition of mind; a spiritual possession; a way of feeling, thinking and living”. To have suffered, rejoiced, and hoped together makes a people a nation, says Ernest Renan. According to Lord Bryce, nationality refers to a group of people who are psychologically and emotionally bound by the common ties of language and literature, ideas, customs and traditions.‘Nation’ is primarily a political concept. It has come to be equated with ‘state’. When a group of people, bound by strong cultural and emotional ties, organise themselves into apolitical unit, they become a nation. Thus nation means ‘state plus nationality’. To quote Bryce, a nation is “a nationality which has organised itself into a political body, either independent or desiring to be independent”. Though ‘state’ and ‘nation’ are now being used as synonimous words, some subtle distinction may be made between them. While ‘state’ refers primarily to the political dimension, ‘nation’ signifies mainly the cultural and emotional unity of the people. Nation implies the keen desire of people to live together under a government and their determination to resist their subjugation by a foreign government. To quote Ramsay Muir, “a nation is abody of people who feel themselves tobe actually linked together by certain affinities which are so strong and real for them that they can live happily together, are dissatisfied when disunited, and cannot tolerate subjection to peoples who do not share these ties”. Though rare, itis possible that there is a state which is not yet anation. For example, before the war of 1914-1918, Austria-Hungary was astate, butnot anation; its people who were not culturally homogeneous, did not make a.united social group.yucioncli ! united States of America which consists of we ral groups of Pe with different social, jaturl and economic backgrounds, can ill-afford call itself anation. Some scholars have described as ‘melting-pot -On the other hand, a state consist of several Nationalities. While a part ete population of Switzerland is of German rationality. another part of itis of French nationality, Nationalism ‘Nationalism’ which is closely related to ‘nation’ is primarily a psychological concept though it has cultural, philosophical and political dimensions. It refers to a state of mind of the people strongly conscious of their common heritage, Common aspirations and group identity. Their group identity is nourished by their memory of common struggles, common victories or common failures. Over the years they invent some myths and symbols which help in building and gradually strengthening their group identity. Nationalism is the supreme group consciousness; it crosses narrow boundaries of small groups based on caste, ethnicity or religion, and has the potential to vigorously mobilise almost the entire population ora large part thereof for their common and supreme causes; it can make them rise above narrow considerations and loyalties. Nationalism stimulates the highest loyalty of the people to the state which is, as Hegel would say, the most important medium for realising the world spirit. Hans Kohn has said, “Nationalism isastate of mind, permeating the large majority of people and claiming to permeate all its members; it te as the ideal form of tecognises the nation-stal : Political organisation and nationality as the source ofall creative cultural energy and of economic well-being. The supreme loyalty of is a therefore, due to his nationality, as his own lifeis 409 supposedly rooted in and made Possible by j welfare'”, He has further obse. ys ee served Nationalism is a political creed that underlies the cohesion of moder societies and legitimize, their claim to authority, Nationalism centres the supreme loyalty of the overwhelming majority of the people upon the nation-state, either existing or desired...?.” Evolution of Nationalism In ancient times itis the Greeks and Romans who had some idea of nationalism. Only recently did nationalism come in more concrete form. During the 18th and 19th centuries nationalism developed strong roots. As a result of the Renaissance and Reformation the people of Britain started feeling that they were a distinct nationality. Similarly, the French nationalism, in away, was a product of the French Revolution which shifted the loyalty of the people from the King to the state. All the major wars that have been fought in the 19th and the 20th centuries since the Nepoleonic War have, in one way or other, contributed to the growth of nationalism. While some powerful countries, being inspired by their national glories, and in pursuit of their perceived national interests, invaded some other countries, the latter, in their determination to defend themselves, tried to unite and mobilise their people under their national flags.and make great sacrifices for sake of their national independence. Thus war is related to the growth of nationalism in both countries — the aggressor and the victim. However, the nationalism of the aggressor country would gradually wane whereas that of the victim country would be greatly strengthened. i di ‘We may mention the names of Machiavelli, Mazzini, Fichte and Hegel. as some ct the eminent people who have contributed to the rise+410 of nationalism as a trend in international politics. Machiavelli. the celebrated alian statesman. advocated the creation of a United Italian state. Mazzini, whoplayeda great vole in unifying Italy, that the freedom of Italy would be cure unless free ftaly was Incomplete and ins nded by free nations. Mazzini favoured and opposed arbitrary, on conquest and greed. He said, ones based uf ~The countries of the peoples will arise instead of the countries of Kings und privileged classe: and between those countries there will be harmony and fraternity”. German nationalism which largely sprang from universities was based upon here worship and the assumption that the German race is superior to German philosophers like Tivitschke and primar othe: Hegel the state and added that it was not bound by any international morality. They praised the supposed virtues of force and war. and, no wonder, created the intellectual climate for the rise of militant und narrow nationalism in Germany. mphasized the supremacy and power of ny Factors of Nationalism Several factors contribute to the growth of nationalism. The importance of these factors would vary from country to country, from time to time even within the same country. Some factors are more or less of permanent value: these hardly decline in importance. But some other factors may prove to be effective at one time after which their effectiveness may decrease and wane. For example, common sufferings at the hands of British imperialism and common struggle against it united the people of India by a strong common bond. But today this factor hardly arouses love for India and love for one another among Indians. With the passage of time the festivity and solemnity of the Political Theory : Concepts, Issues and ldeolog iey Independence Day celebration in India is fag, declining. On the other hand, the Hindus of India constituting a large majority of its population, feel united by a common bond of their common religious association with Lord Rama, Lord Krishna, Lord Siva and other Gods ang Goddesses worshipped throughout Indi Common sufferings and common struggle fora cause may be temporary. But common religion and common cultural heritage are unlikely to dim in their shine. 1, Racial/Ethnic Factor : Common racial origin has been used many times in the past to whip up national feeling and solidarity. The most famous (or infamous ?) example was the successful attempt of Hitler to forge militant and aggressive German nationalism by overplaying the already existing theory that German race is superior to all other races on the earth. One race may form one nation. Sometimes a nation is composed of several races. One of best examples of this type is the United States, described as a “melting pot’. It consists of several races; immigrants from several other countries have come and settled there. In spite of their racial differences, they are still inspired by American dreams and achievements. Whites and Blacks are clearly two distinct racial groups of the US. There is a great deal of tension between them. But at the time of national crisis, they stand shoulder to shoulder and fight together for national honour and survival. This is more or less true of Indian nationalism. It is inhabited by several racial and ethnic groups. ‘Aryas’ of the north claim superiority over the ‘Dravidas’ of the south. But neither of them feels less Indian than the other. 2. Territory : People living ina geographically contiguous area over many yearsnationalism rimes ah gense Of affinity, themselves. Over the yeu common values, beliefs i which help in buildi along time, the Jews, befoy of the state of Israel in | Jewish nationalism though they were scattered indifferent parts of the world without having a common home. The same thing may be said about the Palestine people today. They do not have yet a united state of their own: many of them are living as refugees in different countries—mostly in Arab countries. But they are strongly and intensely motivated by Palestine 1. In spite of great sacrifices in terms of lives that they have had to make all these rs since 1948, they are still fighting to have their own home. re the establishment 948, were inspired by 3. Common History : The people with common history tend to develop a feeling that they are one in the sense that they belong to the same nation, Such common history may include moments of glory/sorrow, common struggle against a foreign ruler or common fight for some ciher noble cause. They would also develop a sense of common belonging if they have common ‘eligious myths, In India, innumerable people feel alike when they hear stories of Ramayan and Mahabharat, or see these stories enacted in theatre or cinema, Similarly the See a gele spendence makes Americi Stuggle for independence makes A\ nee e ‘cowboy of the American makes America fraternity, frontieris another t ins fee] i theme which alike and develop mutual cnn es ening . Powerful medium of forging unity among People. It makes an individual identify himself with a group or community whose members speak the language he speaks. Its importance as an agent of nationalism novwithstanding, itis not indispensable for it. A nation may still be strongly united although it has more than one language. One of the best examples is Switzerland which is a multilingual state. However, sometimes multi- linguality is a bar to strong nationalism, The Presence of so many languages and dialects in India seem to militate against its national unity. 5. Religion : Religion, a great emotive force, has the potential to intensely and violently ‘arouse the emotions of people in defence of their religion. In a short time it can bind people together and inspire (or instigate) them to indulge in activities (some times involving violence) for defending their religion if they see it ‘in danger’. Religion can motivate people to fight for a separate nation for those who have the same religion. Rightly or wrongly, many Muslims of British India successfully demanded a separate state for them on the basis of religion, and this demand was encouraged by the British government which sought to divide and weaken the freedom movement in India. The result was the creation of Pakistan which the seo Congress Party had to agree to after muc ition and protest. Pes sal of the state of Israel was sh religion. However. Jinly based on the Jewish religio : the eg of religion as a! unifying bee: a wea undermined inrecent years. East412 was separated from Pakistan and formed a separate country called Bangladesh in 1971. Religious bond could not prevent it. With the continued flow of immigrants the United States is increasingly characterised by religious heterogeneity. Still then American nationalism has not faced any threat. India, a country of many religions, has not yet been free of communal violence. But hardly has Indian nationalism been subjected to extremely severe strain. The Khalistan movement, no doubt, posed some problems for Indian unity, Butitis hoped that Indian nationalism would prove strong enough to defeat religious fanaticisms occasionally occurring here and there. 6. Culture : Culture, a multi-faceted phenomenon, manifests itself in several forms and in several places. It comprises traditions, customs, dance, music, literature, festivals, and common memories of achievements and failures which, despite their apparent diversities and distance, have a common thread which binds the people together and infuses in them a feeling of oneness and brotherhood. Different dances like Bharatnatyam, Odissi and Manipuri etc. having evolved in different regions of India, have developed their own styles and forms, but all of them generally try to portray the same thing and. convey the same message. For example, the Radha-Krishna love is common to all of them. Similarly, the writings of Rabindranath Tagore and Bankim Chandra Chatterjee have equal appeal in all parts of India. Same Gods and Goddesses are worshipped all over the country. And these help not only in giving birth toa sense of Indian unity, but also in nourishing and strengthening it. 7. Common Aspirations : Common ufferings would motivate people, to, ci sullering Say people. to.come,.. Political Theory : Concepts, I: sues and Ideologies together and take united steps to end their ings. These sufferings may be inflicted by sufferit vermment. Extemal an oppressive foreign ruler/go threat to the security ofa country tends to make its people more nationalist than ever before, They forget their narrow mutual differences and cleavages and there takes place a sudden and big upsurge in their love for their mother-land. Atthe time of Chinese invasion, Indians of all languages, religions and regions, showed tremendous sense of national unity and were united by common determination to throw back the enemy from the soil of their country. Faced with the hostility and attack of a super power — the United States —, the people of Vietnam, in general, stood strongly united; their common goal was to liberate their nation from America’s neo- imperialistic domination. Common dangers set acommon goal for a people which, in its turn, binds them together and instils in them a strong sense of nationalism. 8. Sovereignty : It has been argued that sovereignty is the mother of nationalism; the creation of a state gives rise to nationalism, and not vice versa. In a few cases it may happen oreven may have happened. But, in general, its reverse is true: it is nationalism which leads to the creation of a state. Much before states, in the modern sense, came into being, nationalism was already there. Renan has observed that the essence of the nation lies in the unity of race, language, religion, community of interest, or geographical unity. He has further said that the nation is ‘a spiritual Principle’ and that it owes its origin to (a) arich “heritage of memories’ and (b) a keen ‘desire to live together’. More or less in the same vein, Spengler has said that “nations are neither linguistic nor political nor biological, but spiritualNetionatisr ses”. No doubt, nationalism is parly a ul jective thing, being based upon the ‘community ofimterests and desires. But this unity of interests and desires of the people is largely a product and reflection of certain objective factors like ography, racial/ethnic origin, language and religionetc. ‘The desire of a people to be a nation js,toagreat extent, based upon their experiences and perception of interests resulting from their living in an objective world, Self-determination and Nationalism There are generally two views regarding the relationship between state and nationality. One view states that every nationality should have a state. This view had its origin in the evolution of principle of ‘self-determination’ . It received some amount of official sanction of the international community at the Congress of Vienna. This view got further impetus during the First World War (1914-1919). The post-war diplomacy gave a lot of encouragement to the principle of self-determination championed then by President Woodrow Wilson of the United States. In defence of this principle it has been argued that a state consisting of several nationalities would be devoid of patriotic feeling. ‘This view was echoed in the writing of J.S. Mill who said in his Representative Government :“Itis in general a necessary condition of free institutions that the boundaries of government should coincide with those of nationality”. There are, however, some scholars who oppose the “one nationality, one state view”. They regard it as a dangerous principle, and a big obstacle to world progress. They argue that ‘state’ and ‘nationality’ stand on different bases and nationality may exist even after the destruction of the state concerned. According to them, a state may consist of several 413 nationalities, and one nationality may spread over several states. The chief proponents of the second view are Lord Acton, Zimmern, and Bernard Joseph. Joseph argues that national and state loyalty are two different things and they can exist side by side with each other. Nationality Tequires only freedom for cultural and social life, and a certain amount of group autonomy, particularly in communal matters. He thinks that world order and harmony is possible when several nationalities can live in harmony and cooperation within a state, and each of them, at the same time, follows its own national life*. ‘Types of Nationalism Kohn has divided nationalism into two types, namely, ‘Open nationalism’ and ‘Closed nationalism®”. The open nationalism is more modern than the other type. It is also more secular. Its basis is the desire of a group of fellow citizens living generally in a contiguous territory and forming a political society. These people may be of the same racial/ethnic descent or may be belonging to several races/ethnic groups. The closed nationalism has a parochial basis. The common origin (race, blood), and rootedness in the ancestral soil are the main motivating forces of this type of nationalism. The ‘closed nationalism’ generally claims ‘purity’, and its superiority over others. In order to retain its native ‘purity’, it seeks to keep itself away from, alien influences. * Lerche and Said have differentiated ‘young’ nationalism from ‘Old’ nationalism®, According, to them, old nationalism is the one which took birth in the countries of Europe primarily in the 18th and 19th centuries. The original objective of oldnationalism was to effect the centralisation of government through the unity of law and administration. Later it aimed at more liberal414 objectives like ending royal absolutism and bringing more freedoms to the people, In course of time nationalism in Europe tended to become more and more secular. Young nationalism, observe Lerche and Said, is modern nationalism which has taken roots in different countries of Asia and Africa in the 20th century. Its growth has been due mainly to two. factors. One is the desire of the people of these countries to gain independence from their colonial masters, and to safeguard their independence, after it was won, from external threats. Secondly, the elites of these countries, caught between the old order which is not able to cope with new demands, and the western values which are, to some extent, irrelevant and noteasily welcome, seek to use nationalism to help them in tackling this dilemma. Demerits of Nationalism Nationalism is a two-edged sword; it can cuteither way. Itcan stimulate the development of acountry. Itcan also drag it towards destruction. On several occasions in the past nationalism has been misused. It has been used to satisfy the whims ofa dictator or promote the vested interests of an oligarchy or some narrow interests of a nation. Myths, inspired by past national glories— often unfounded—tend to make the people blind, irrational, egoistic and proud. Pursuit of narrow national interests would end in purposeless wars between/among nations. Hays says that narrow and blind nationalisms “aproud and boastful habit of mind about one’s own nation accompanied by a supercilious or hostile attitude towards other nations”. Nationalism which grows chauvinistic and aggressive has been criticised as ‘wolf-pack nationalism’. Shillito has described it as ‘man’s otherreligion’. Itmakes man fanatically committed to some illogical and irrational causes. In the long Political Theory : Concepts, Issues and Meologies efits neither to the ng run, it brings ben concerned, nor to its members Economic nationalism, in its extreme form, is knwon as ‘autarchy’. Its aim of compleig economic self-sufficiency is self-defeating. jp would ruin the economy of the Country concerned. It may be the cause of a needless war, In the past American milk and apples were foolishly dumped in the rivers and the wheat of Canada was burnt while millions were starving in many third world countries. In Short, nationalism is likely to 1. make anation proud and egoistic; 2. make a nation pursue narrow interests; 3. make it contemptuous of other nations, and hostile towards them; 4, involve anation in irrational wars; and encourage a nation to pursue imperialistic objectives. Further, militant nationalism, which to quote C.D. Burns, ‘narrows down the political outlook’ of the man, tends to degenerate into ‘aggregate barbarism’, and is a serious threat to the peace and order of the international system. Merits of Nationalism Nationalism gives a sense of dignity to the, man. He feels that as a member of the nation he is something. His life becomes meaningful because he has to do something for the nation of which he is proud and which is a great source of inspiration and hope for him. Nationalism also provides the individual with a sense of identity. Many people often pass through a lot of uncertainties, tensions and frustrations while searching for their role in life. They ask themselves without often getting the answer: “What am I? Where am I going ? What is my mission in life 2” Such people get alot of relief by identifying themselves with the nation.anions Nationalism is asecular force. It tends to aden the mental horizon of the man, It keeps above the narrow loyalties like casteism, jnmunalisi™, regionalism, and linguism ete. jence to the nation would help him in being jiberated from these parochial bondages/ dentification with the nation would make the individual largely secular and free him of narrow piases and feelings. It is also an integrating force: ithelps in keeping together several castes, religions, races and other groups, and makes them feel alike and develop a feeling of brotherhood. {tstimulates group harmony and order. ‘Nationalism helps in containing colonialism, neo-colonialism and imperialism. Love of nation would inspire its members to make sacrifices necessary to make it free of foreign domination. It was the wave of nationalism which succeeded in sweeping away a large number of the structures of colonialism in Africa and Asia in the post-war period. In many cases nationalism has encouraged self-determination and democracy. lationalities tend to demand independent political status for themselves through self-determination. 415 In the words of Bryce, “it symbolises the struggle for the realisation of liberalism. democracy and self-government”. Conclusion : The above discussion suggests that nationalism has the potential to be beneficial as well as harmful. It may be both divisive and integrative. It may inspire people, to quote Ebenstein, to do ‘acts of heroism’; it may also motivate them to commit ‘crimes of cruelty and fanaticism’. We may conclude this discussion on nationalism with an important passage from Kohn: “ Itis.adivisive force in a world growing more and more interdependent, a force capable of producing bitter tensions and one-sided, self-righteous judgements that threaten the national solution of international conflicts. On the other hand, nationalism is an important factor in preventing any ‘one or two of the strongest powers fromestablishing their hegemony over the whole globe or over a large part of it. In that respect, nationalism is a form of resistance to imposed uniformity, a bulwork of the beneficial diversity, individuality, and liberty of collective groups..