Key Takeaways
1. Nationalism is a Modern Discursive Formation, Not an Ancient Truth
Nationalism is significant not only in crises and overt conflicts. It is basic to collective identity in the modern era, and to the specific form of state which has predominated for the last 200 years.
A pervasive rhetoric. Nationalism is more than just a political doctrine or a series of conflicts; it's a fundamental way of thinking, speaking, and acting that shapes our understanding of the world. This "discursive formation" influences everything from citizenship and passports to how we view history, organize sports, and even perceive ourselves. It provides a common language for diverse movements, state policies, and cultural expressions, making it a core feature of modernity.
Beyond political doctrine. While nationalism is often summarized as the principle that political and national units should align, this definition is too narrow. It fails to capture the emotional power and cultural depth of nationalism, which permeates daily life outside explicit political concerns. People respond to nationalist messages—from flags to calls to arms—for reasons deeper than mere doctrine, indicating its profound role in shaping collective identity and pride.
Not a simple problem. Viewing nationalism solely as a problem to be remedied, or an issue that will fade once borders are clarified, misses its enduring influence. It's a complex phenomenon that helps define who "we" are, inspires art, and connects individuals to a shared history, offering a sense of immortality. This deep-seated presence means it's not simply "good" or "bad," but a fundamental aspect of modern social reality.
2. Nations are "Imagined Communities" Constructed, Not Primordial
For every effective nationalism, there are n potential ones, groups defined either by shared culture inherited from the agrarian world or by some other link . . . which could give hope of establishing a homogeneous industrial community, but which nevertheless do not bother to struggle, which fail to activate their potential nationalism, which do not even try.
Constructed, not given. The idea that nations are ancient, natural entities is a powerful illusion fostered by nationalism itself. In reality, nations are historical and sociological creations, often "invented" or consciously constructed by elites to mobilize followers and legitimize power. This process is evident in how maps began to depict the world as neatly divided into territories with clear borders, a modern practice reflecting new forms of state power and social organization.
The role of map-making. Modern maps, with their sharp national boundaries, are not neutral reflections of reality but products of a specific historical transformation.
- Stronger European states: Gained military and administrative power, unifying territories and creating stable oppositions.
- Domestic administrative capacity: States sponsored surveys, censuses, and infrastructure (roads, railways) to integrate populations.
- European imperialism: Divided the world into colonial territories, often consolidating disparate principalities into new administrative units.
- Technological advances: Better cartography (Ptolomaic geometry, aerial views) and printing made maps widely available, reinforcing the image of a world of distinct nation-states.
Beyond simple ethnicity. While cultural commonalities and strong affective ties exist, they don't automatically lead to nationhood. Nationalism selects and reconstructs aspects of tradition, transforming them into a coherent national identity. The "invention of tradition" is not a sign of falsity, but rather how nations come to feel "primordial" and deeply real to their members, even if their historical claims are dubious.
3. Nationalism Transforms Relational Bonds into Categorical Identities
There is an important distinction between webs of interpersonal solidarity and demands for oneness with broad categories of ostensibly similar people.
From networks to categories. Historically, social solidarity was often organized through kinship and descent, forming dense, complex networks of identifiable relationships (e.g., nuclear family, lineages, clans). Nationalism, however, shifts this to "categorical identities," where individuals are identified by shared attributes as members of an abstract set of equivalents, rather than by specific, direct interpersonal ties.
Ethnicity as an intermediary. Ethnicity sits between kinship and nationality. It emerges when diverse groups interact in a common territory, often in cities or empires, where kinship ties are insufficient for large-scale organization. Externally, an ethnic group appears as a category of similar members, even if internally it retains kinship structures. Nationalism then often elevates a specific ethnic identity to a "trump card" over all other forms of identity.
The "one family" rhetoric. Nationalist leaders often use kinship metaphors ("we are one family") to evoke emotional power. However, this differs fundamentally from traditional kinship:
- Scope: Nationalist rhetoric applies only to the entire country, demanding priority over smaller or cross-cutting loyalties.
- Structure: It posits a whole category of people without internal differentiation, where each individual is directly a member of the nation.
- Moral commitment: It can lead to chilling demands for loyalty to the abstract nation, potentially overriding family bonds, as individuals derive identity directly from national membership.
4. Nationalist Histories are Selective Narratives, Not Objective Records
Forgetting, I would even go so far as to say historical error, is a crucial factor in the creation of a nation, which is why progress in historical studies often constitutes a danger for [the principle of] nationality.
Constructing a shared past. Nationalism actively encourages the production of historical accounts that give readers and students a sense of collective identity. These "Whig histories" present a favorable, often linear, narrative of national development, embedding actors and events in the nation's story even if they had no conception of that nation at the time. This process is not neutral; it's a deliberate construction.
Masking internal divisions. Nationalist historiography often downplays or erases internal conflicts, violence, and diverse origins to present an image of unity. For example:
- US Civil War: Framed as fratricide to emphasize a common American family, despite deep divisions.
- French nation-building: Eradicated quasi-autonomous cultures and languages, subordinating differences to a unified French identity.
- Post-communist states: Appealed to a pre-communist past of imagined national unity, overlooking historical complexities.
Ethnicity as a historical claim. While some scholars argue for the deep roots of nations in "ethnie" (ethnic communities with shared myths and symbols), even these are continually re-enacted and reconstructed. Nationalist ideologues often invoke primordial ethnicity to legitimize claims, but this is a rhetorical strategy. The "felt reality" of a national identity, rather than its objective antiquity, is what matters for mobilization.
5. The Modern State is the Crucible of National Integration and Legitimacy
The integrated political and cultural communities we understand as nations were created in large part by the rise of such states.
State power and national unity. The rise of modern states, particularly in Europe, was fundamental to the formation of nations. These states developed enhanced administrative capacity, unifying territories, replacing indirect rule with direct control, and asserting clear boundaries. This process involved:
- Pacification: Eliminating non-state violence within borders.
- Military mobilization: Citizen armies fostered common identity and distinction from neighbors.
- Resource extraction: Increased taxation and conscription required greater administrative integration and knowledge of populations.
- Infrastructure development: Roads, railways, and communication systems knitted together dispersed populations.
Ascending legitimacy. A crucial thread in nationalism's development was the idea that political power is legitimate only when it reflects the will or serves the interests of "the people." This "ascending" notion of legitimacy, rooted in republican thought and popular uprisings, transformed the concept of political community.
- Sovereignty of the people: Nations were understood as historical "beings" with rights and a will, capable of bestowing legitimacy on a government.
- Direct membership: Individuals became direct members of the state, not merely subjects of a ruler or members of intermediate associations.
- Cultural basis for political community: Nationhood offered a cultural foundation for demarcating sovereign political communities, defining who belonged and who didn't.
Homogenization and its costs. The drive for national unity often led to coercive efforts to produce cultural conformity. France, for example, achieved cultural integration through centralized education, linguistic standardization, and violent struggles against religious differences. This process, while creating a unified nation, also involved the destruction or subordination of local cultures and could be as brutal as "ethnic cleansing" seen in other contexts.
6. Nationalism Mediates Between the Global and the Local
The rhetoric of nationalism presented nations as mediators between the global (the world system of nation-states and transnational organizations) and the local (the internal affairs and internal lines of cultural or other distinction).
A global framework for local identity. Nationalism emerged as a way to conceptualize identities on a scale commensurate with modern capitalist markets and states. It responded to the dramatic expansion of social life beyond direct interpersonal relationships. The idea of nation inherently presumes a world of other comparable units, making it an international discourse.
The nation as a "token of a global type." In a world-system of nation-states, each nation is presented as a unique entity, yet also as formally equivalent to others. This means:
- Standardization: Diverse polities (city-states, empires, tribes) gave way to a standardized system of sovereign nation-states.
- Formal equivalence: All nation-states, regardless of size or power, are treated as formally equal in international forums like the UN.
- Internal affairs: Local communities, ethnicities, and regional groupings are constituted as "interior" to the nation-state, making their issues "internal affairs" free from external intervention.
Reconceptualizing the "local." For countries like China, which historically saw itself as a "middle kingdom" or "civilization itself," nationalism offered a new framework. It allowed China to:
- Become one among many: Reconceptualize itself as a "guo" (nation) among other equivalent units.
- Retain cultural content: Justify learning from the West for practical purposes while retaining a distinct "spiritual essence."
- Address diaspora: Grapple with the identity of Chinese people living outside its borders, leading to concepts like "irredentism."
7. Imperialism and Capitalism Fueled the Rise of Nationalism
Colonialism drove nationalism forward even while it resisted it.
Colonialism's paradoxical role. Imperial rule, by its nature, did not seek to forge a unity between nation and state; it left local and ethnic groups largely intact. However, the presence of colonial regimes stimulated nationalism in several ways:
- Elite frustration: Colonial elites (e.g., Latin American creoles, educated indigenous people) found their aspirations blocked within imperial systems, leading them to embrace nationalism as a political strategy.
- Counterweight to colonial claims: Colonial ideology often claimed the colonized were disunited and incapable of self-organization, prompting nationalists to affirm or develop a unified national identity.
- Indigenous reinvention: While nationalism was a "modular" international discourse, anti-colonial movements reinvented it, combining indigenous traditions with international rhetoric to frame their opposition.
Capitalism's indirect influence. Capitalism, as a global engine of large-scale organization, profoundly impacted nationalism:
- Undermining local bonds: It pulled individuals out of communal bonds, reducing the capacity of local communities and kinship networks to mediate large-scale social life.
- Promoting individualism: It organized people as owners of private property or sellers of labor, fostering an individualistic ethos.
- Creating new connections: It facilitated large-scale, indirect social relations through markets, multinational corporations, and "print capitalism" (newspapers, novels), which helped spread nationalist ideology and shared culture.
Economic and political intertwining. The expansion of capitalism and the world-system of states were deeply linked. States mediated global market activity, and the "nation" became the domestic market, while other nations became competitors. This global order, prone to crises, often led to localized problems that were then framed and responded to through nationalist discourse, sometimes violently.
8. The Individual and the Nation are Intertwined Modern Concepts
The modern idea of the person was forged partly in the context of political philosophy and law. When Locke, for example, asks under what circumstances people can be autonomous citizens, he is probing the nature of responsible personhood at the same time as he is exploring how sovereign power might be distributed among citizens.
The "punctual self" and the "super-individual." Nationalism arose in tandem with the modern idea of the individual as a self-sufficient, self-contained, and self-moving entity. Just as persons are understood as unitary, nations are held to be integral, indivisible, and bearers of a distinctive identity. This creates a powerful, unmediated relationship between the individual and the sovereign whole.
Direct membership and trump cards. In nationalist discourse, one is simply Chinese, French, or Eritrean, without requiring the mediation of family, community, or region. Nationality is an attribute of the individual, reinforcing its status as a "trump card" over other identities, especially in times of national crisis. This can lead to:
- Repression of difference: Pressure for national unity often becomes pressure for conformity, with specific identities (e.g., women, workers, minorities) relegated to private preference or seen as challenges to national unity.
- Sacrifice for the nation: The idea of direct allegiance can lead to children informing on parents or individuals sacrificing their lives for the nation, a stark contrast to kinship-based loyalties.
Gendered nationalism. Nationalism often takes on a strikingly gendered character, defining national strength through military power and treating men as potential martyrs while women are primarily seen as mothers or symbols of national purity. This can lead to:
- Patriarchal practices: Affirming masculinist traditions and restricting women's public roles.
- Procreation emphasis: Linking the nation's future to population growth, making issues like rape a crime against the national bloodline.
- Contestation: While nationalist appeals to individual equivalence offer a basis for women to claim rights, the emphasis on traditional gender roles often creates tension.
9. Nationalism is a Powerful, Yet Double-Edged, Force for Identity and Action
If it were merely illusion and manipulation it could not have the power that it does.
A source of meaning and solidarity. Nationalism is not simply a negative force or a tool of manipulation; it provides a profound sense of meaning, inspiration, and mutual commitment for very large groups of people. It helps individuals feel located in a complex world and connected to a vast sweep of history, offering a powerful sense of belonging and purpose.
The dark side of unity. Despite its positive aspects, nationalism carries inherent dangers:
- Exclusion and subjugation: The drive for internal homogeneity can lead to the repression of difference, exclusion of "foreign" elements, and even ethnic cleansing.
- Misrecognition: Nationalist discourse can deflect attention from internal conflicts (e.g., economic inequality) by focusing on external threats or national humiliation, leading to a "misrecognition" of underlying problems.
- Authoritarian tendencies: While often linked to democracy and self-determination, nationalism is not inherently democratic. It can be employed by elites to justify authoritarian rule, demand conformity, and suppress dissent in the name of national interest.
An enduring force. Even as some predict the decline of nation-states in a globalized world, they remain the primary framework for large-scale projects of democracy and self-determination. The world-system of states continues to incentivize nationalist claims for sovereignty, making it both a necessary tool for participation in world affairs and a constraint on new claims for statehood. Nationalism's open-ended potential means it can advance old solidarities or create entirely new ones, making it a persistent and powerful force in the modern world.
Last updated:
