Chapter 7 Nationalism

7.1 Introducing Nationalism

Common understandings of nationalism often involve concepts like patriotism, national symbols (flags), and willingness to make sacrifices for one's country. While events like national parades visually represent these ideas, defining nationalism precisely and universally accepted remains challenging. Despite this difficulty, nationalism is a crucial subject because it profoundly influences global affairs.

Over the past two centuries, nationalism has been a highly influential political force, shaping history and inspiring intense emotions, both loyalty and animosity. It has played a dual role: simultaneously uniting people and dividing them, contributing to liberation from oppressive regimes while also fueling conflict, bitterness, and wars. Nationalism has been a key factor in the disintegration of empires and states and in the constant redrawing of state boundaries.

Historically, nationalism has gone through different phases:

• In 19th century Europe, it led to the consolidation of smaller entities into larger nation-states, exemplified by the formation of modern Germany and Italy. This process also saw the gradual merging of local languages and loyalties into common national ones, giving people a new political identity tied to the nation-state.
• Conversely, nationalism also contributed to the breakup of large empires like the Austro-Hungarian and Russian empires in Europe and the colonial empires (British, French, Dutch, Portuguese) in Asia and Africa. Independence movements in colonised nations were essentially nationalist struggles aiming to establish self-governing nation-states free from foreign control.

The process of reconfiguring state borders continues today. Since the mid-20th century, even established nation-states have faced nationalist demands from internal groups or regions, sometimes including calls for outright separation and independent statehood. Separatist movements exist globally (e.g., Quebec in Canada, Basques in Spain, Kurds in Turkey/Iraq, Tamils in Sri Lanka), and similar sentiments are present in India. While pan-nationalisms (like Arab nationalism seeking unity) exist, separatist movements often aim to divide existing states.

Despite the complexities, nationalism remains a potent force. Key questions arise: What constitutes a nation? Why do people identify as nations? What are their aspirations, and why are individuals willing to sacrifice for their nation? How are claims to nationhood linked to the demand for statehood? Do nations possess an inherent right to statehood or national self-determination? Can nationalist demands be met without granting separate statehood?

7.2 Nations And Nationalism

A nation is not merely a random collection of people, nor is it the same as other social groups like families (based on direct personal interaction) or tribes/clans (based on kinship ties, even if members don't know each other directly). In a nation, most members will never meet or share direct kinship, yet they feel a sense of belonging, value their national identity, and consider the nation real.

It's a common but often inaccurate belief that nations are formed by people sharing inherent traits like common descent, language, religion, or ethnicity. In reality, there is no single set of characteristics uniformly present in all nations:

• Many nations are linguistically diverse (e.g., Canada has English and French speakers; India has numerous languages).
• Many nations comprise people of multiple religions.
• Similarly, common race or descent is not a universal defining feature of nations.

Given this diversity, what truly constitutes a nation? A nation is largely an 'imagined community'. Its existence and cohesion stem from the collective beliefs, shared aspirations, and imaginations of its members. It relies on certain fundamental assumptions that individuals make about the larger collective group with which they identify.

Shared Beliefs

Unlike tangible things like mountains or rivers, nations are not physical objects independent of human perception. Their existence is based on a collective belief. To consider a group of people a nation means recognising their shared identity and a common vision for their future, particularly their aspiration for an independent political existence.

Think of a sports team: it exists because the individuals involved see themselves and act as a collective unit. Without this shared self-conception, they would just be separate individuals engaged in an activity. Similarly, a nation becomes real when its members believe they belong together as a single entity.

History

A crucial component of national identity is a sense of continuous historical existence. Nations perceive themselves as having a shared past that stretches back in time and a future to look forward to. This historical consciousness is constructed by drawing upon collective memories, shared legends, and historical records to outline the enduring identity of the nation.

For instance, Indian nationalists referred to the country's ancient civilisation and rich cultural heritage to assert a long and uninterrupted history, arguing that this civilisational continuity formed the bedrock of the Indian nation. Leaders like Jawaharlal Nehru highlighted the underlying "oneness" that connected people across diverse appearances and experiences throughout India's history.

Territory

Nations typically identify strongly with a specific territory, which they often refer to as their 'homeland'. Residing together on a particular land for an extended period helps people develop a sense of collective identity and envision themselves as a unified populace. The physical land holds deep symbolic meaning, often referred to with terms like motherland, fatherland, or holy land.

For example, despite being dispersed globally for centuries, the Jewish people maintained a claim to their historical homeland in Palestine. The Indian nation identifies its collective being with the geographical features of the subcontinent, including its rivers, mountains, and diverse regions.

However, the fact that different groups may lay claim to the same territory is a significant and persistent source of conflict worldwide.

Shared Political Ideals

While shared history and territory are important, what distinctly characterises a group as a nation is a shared vision for the future and a collective aspiration for independent political existence (statehood). Members of a nation often agree on the fundamental values and principles they want their state and society to embody, such as democracy, secularism, or liberalism. These ideals form the basis of their collective identity and the terms under which they agree to live together.

In a democratic context, a shared commitment to a set of political values and ideals is arguably the most desirable foundation for a political community or nation-state. Membership in such a community involves mutual obligations stemming from the recognition of each other's rights as citizens. The strength of a nation is reinforced when its people acknowledge and fulfil their obligations to their fellow members. This mutual recognition of obligations serves as a strong indicator of loyalty to the nation.

Common Political Identity

Some argue that shared political ideals are insufficient to bind people into a nation and that a shared cultural identity (like common language or descent) is also necessary. While sharing a language eases communication and common religious beliefs or practices can create bonds (celebrating festivals, sharing symbols), relying solely on a single cultural identity can undermine core democratic values like equality and liberty.

There are two main reasons for this:

1. Internal Diversity: All major religions are internally diverse, containing various sects with differing interpretations. Basing national identity on a single religion risks ignoring this internal complexity and could lead to an authoritarian or oppressive society.
2. Societal Diversity: Most societies are multicultural and multilinguistic. Imposing a single religious or linguistic identity for national belonging necessarily excludes minority groups. This can restrict their religious freedom or disadvantage those who do not speak the mandated language, severely limiting the democratic ideal of equal treatment and liberty for all.

For these reasons, it is preferable in democracies to define the nation in political terms rather than narrow cultural terms. Loyalty should be expected towards constitutional values and principles, rather than adherence to a specific religion, race, or language. This approach helps create a more inclusive identity.

While we've explored how nations express their collective identity and why democratic states should base this on shared political ideals, the reasons why people *imagine* themselves as a nation and their specific aspirations require further discussion.

7.3 National Self-Determination

A key aspiration distinguishing nations from other groups is the claim to national self-determination – the right to govern themselves and decide their own future. This claim often includes seeking recognition from the international community as a distinct political entity or state. It frequently arises from groups who have historically lived together on a specific territory and share a strong sense of common identity. In some instances, the claim is also driven by a desire to form a state where the group's culture can be protected or even prioritised.

In the 19th and early 20th centuries, particularly in Europe, the idea of 'one culture - one state' gained currency and influenced the redrawing of borders after World War I (e.g., the Treaty of Versailles creating new, smaller states). However, fulfilling all demands for self-determination based on this principle proved virtually impossible. Attempting to align state boundaries with cultural groups resulted in significant hardship:

• Mass population migrations across new borders.
• Millions of people were displaced from their homes and ancestral lands.
• Many became victims of communal violence.

Humanity paid a heavy price for this effort to create culturally homogeneous nation-states. Moreover, even after these reconfigurations, most newly formed states still contained multiple ethnic and cultural communities. These minorities, often small in number, frequently faced disadvantages, highlighting the ongoing challenge of ensuring minority rights and equal citizenship.

Despite these difficulties, a positive outcome was that this era granted political recognition to various groups who identified as distinct nations and sought the opportunity for self-governance.

The right to national self-determination was also a central demand of national liberation movements in Asia and Africa during their struggles against colonial rule. These movements argued that political independence would restore dignity and recognition to colonised peoples and enable them to protect their collective interests, striving for justice, rights, and prosperity for the nation. Yet, here too, it was nearly impossible to achieve statehood for every cultural group claiming distinct nationhood, leading to continued population movements, border conflicts, and violence in many regions.

This presents a paradox: nation-states that achieved independence through struggles based on self-determination sometimes act oppressively towards minorities within their own borders who claim the same right.

Today, virtually every state grapples with how to handle movements demanding self-determination, prompting a re-evaluation of this right. There is a growing consensus that the solution may not lie in creating an endless number of new states, but rather in making existing states more democratic and equitable. This involves ensuring that people from diverse cultural and ethnic backgrounds can live together as partners and equal citizens. This approach is increasingly seen as essential for resolving self-determination claims constructively and for building strong, unified states. A nation-state that fails to respect the rights and cultural identities of its minorities is likely to struggle to secure the loyalty of all its members.

Demand For National Self-Determination In Basque

The Basque region in Spain provides a case study of demands for national self-determination. This prosperous hilly region is recognised as an autonomous area within the Spanish federation.

However, leaders of the Basque Nationalist Movement seek full independence and separate statehood, using both constitutional means and, historically, violence to press their demand. Their arguments are based on a perceived distinct identity:

• They claim a culture significantly different from Spanish culture.
• They have their own language, unrelated to Spanish, though currently understood by only about a third of the population.
• The region's geography is distinct due to its hilly terrain.
• Historically, they claim the Basque region maintained autonomy from Spanish rulers since Roman times, operating with unique systems of justice, administration, and finance.

The modern nationalist movement was spurred by Spanish attempts to dismantle this autonomy in the late 19th century, followed by further repression under the dictator Franco, who even banned the use of the Basque language in public and private. Although these repressive measures have been lifted, Basque leaders remain wary of the Spanish government's intentions and concerned about migration of 'outsiders' into their region. Opponents argue that the separatists are seeking political gain from an issue that has largely been addressed through autonomy.

7.4 Nationalism And Pluralism

If the 'one culture - one state' model is rejected as impractical and undesirable, societies must find ways for multiple cultures and communities to coexist and flourish within a single country. Many democratic states have implemented measures to acknowledge and protect the identities of cultural minority groups living within their borders.

For example, the Indian Constitution contains detailed provisions specifically for the protection of religious, linguistic, and cultural minorities. Across different countries, various forms of group rights have been granted, including constitutional safeguards for the language, culture, and religion of minority communities and their individual members. In some cases, recognised communities are granted the right to collective representation in legislative bodies and state institutions.

These group rights are often justified as a means to ensure equal treatment and legal protection for individuals within these groups, as well as to safeguard the group's collective cultural identity. Recognising different groups as integral parts of the national community requires defining national identity in an inclusive manner that values the unique contributions of all cultural communities within the state.

While granting recognition and protection is intended to satisfy group aspirations, some groups may still continue to demand separate statehood. This can seem paradoxical in an era of increasing globalisation, yet nationalist sentiments remain a powerful motivator for many communities.

Addressing such demands democratically requires significant political skill, understanding, and a spirit of generosity. The right to national self-determination, originally often interpreted as a right to independent statehood for national groups, is now increasingly reinterpreted. This is partly because granting statehood to every group claiming to be a distinct nation is likely impossible and undesirable; it could create many small, non-viable states and exacerbate minority issues within those new states.

The contemporary world is highly sensitive to the importance of recognising identities, leading to many struggles for group recognition, often articulated using the language of nationalism. While acknowledging identity claims is necessary, it is crucial to prevent them from leading to division and violence within society.

It's important to remember that each person holds multiple identities – based on gender, caste, religion, language, region, etc. Individuals may be proud of all these aspects of their identity. As long as people feel they can freely express the different facets of their personality, they may be less likely to make exclusive political claims based solely on one identity. In a democracy, the political identity of 'citizen' should be broad and inclusive enough to encompass the diverse identities individuals may hold. Allowing intolerant or homogenising forms of identity and nationalism to take root poses a significant danger to societal harmony and democratic principles.

Tagore’s Critique Of Nationalism

The renowned poet Rabindranath Tagore offered a significant critique of certain forms of nationalism. He famously stated, "Patriotism cannot be our final spiritual shelter; my refuge is humanity," clearly prioritising universal humanity over narrow nationalistic loyalty.

Tagore was a strong supporter of India's independence and was critical of British colonial rule, specifically pointing out the lack of respect for "dignity of human relationships" within the colonial administration, a value he believed was otherwise cherished in British civilisation. He differentiated between opposing Western imperialism and rejecting Western civilisation entirely; while advocating for Indians to be rooted in their own culture, he believed they should be open to learning beneficially from abroad.

A critique of what he termed 'patriotism' was a recurring theme in his work. He particularly criticised narrow expressions of nationalism within the Indian independence movement. Tagore feared that a complete rejection of Western influence in favour of what was presented as Indian tradition could become not only self-limiting but also foster hostility towards other external influences and communities already present in India, including Christians, Jews, Zoroastrians, and Muslims.

Exercises