A Paper on Nationalism

By Virgil B. Vallecera

Content: Nationalism and History

Nationalism is a sense of essential political identity. It is the source of individual identity with the people, which are seen as the bearer of sovereignty, the central object of loyalty, and the basis of collective solidarity. As such, nationalism brings together the concepts of state, nations, and nations-state in away that is personally related to the citizens.

However, intellectuals failed to adhere to the canons of scientific research that is why ‘objectivity is not a main concern in nationalism’ (Smith). Instead, nationalism has been interpreted as an autonomous and natural force operating throughout history.

In this regard, a more objective approach in dealing with nationalism should start in the understanding of ‘a world of nations.’

Smith describes a primordialist view as the insistence on the primordial ties of ethnicity and language. Hence, nations began as historical communities, therefore, who share a common ancestry and culminate in a unique and particular genealogy. Primordialists see that ethnic communities emerged our of prehistoric times and entered history as the basic units of human experience.

Other than ethnicity, another important aspect is the relationship between these communities and the nations. Smith proposed that nations being an ethnic community emerges cultural identity with political demands. Hence, nation was a cultural phenomenon and government a political one. Nationalism provides the link between the two. In simple terms, every nation has the right to its own state. This principle originates with the rationalism of the 18^th century, rejecting the personal authority of the monarch as a source of state sovereignty and laying it with the people.

Keeping distance from a primordialist view, the modernist view emphasizes that nationalism is a political strategy so that the activities of nationalist politicians and intellectuals are collectively affecting or causing a common doctrine of nationalism.

This doctrine of nationalism is a simple theory that links an individual to the nation of his or her origin. It provides a national identity to an individual but it is premised on a wider acceptance of a world of nations (Taylor). Having coalesced, the members of the group then act in concert to promote their interests. This national interest often includes founding a state and expanding its strength and territory. Tivey and Smith observe that the core nationalist doctrine includes propositions that:

A1: The world consists of a mosaic of nations;

A2: World order and harmony depends upon expressing this mosaic in a system of free nation-states;

B1: Nations are the natural units of society;

B2: Nations have a cultural homogeneity based on a common ancestry or history;

B3: Every nation requires it own sovereign state for the true expression of its culture;

B4: All nations have an inalienable right to a territory or homeland;

C1: Every individual must belong to a nation;

C2: A person’s primary loyalty is to the nation;

C3: Only through the nation can a person find true freedom.

The doctrine is general to all nationalisms. But each has its own character or special secondary theories embodying a series of myths consisting of distorted histories concerning society/ethnic origins, past heroic ages and betrayals and the ‘special’ place of the nation in world history (Taylor).

Nationalism entails a lot of history since the meaning for the nation is profound: ‘history is the precondition of destiny, the guarantee of our immortality, the lesson for posterity’ (Smith). Without history there can be no nation.

In tracing the histories of nationalism and the nation per se, there are three types of national histories. First is the rediscovery where a nation had a formal political existence over a long period, there will be more sufficiency of historical material in selecting a new set of facts for the new history. Second is where a new nation is less well endowed with material, the history has to be created by conjecture in a process of reconstruction. Lastly, is the simple process of fabrication.

Each historical drama has two components—a sense of continuity and a small number of symbols depicting key events that the whole nation can identify with.

These national histories are a product of a particular present for the purpose of promoting a particular future (Taylor).

Typology

Nationalism comes in a variety of ways. Orridge identifies five basic typologies.

First is proto-nationalism. This nationalism is the source of dispute over the timing of the emergence of nation and nationalism. The ‘people’ factor—originating from the idea of pro patria mori (dying for one’s country)—entered politics but nationalism as an ideology was not fully developed. Hence, nation preceded nationalism.

Second is unification nationalism, which advances that medium-sized states are prevented from evolving under the contradictory pressures of small states (city-scale) and large multi-ethnic empires. It calls for a mosaic of small independent states mixed with provinces of larger empires. The prevention of conflict and the balance of power via state synergies were the very reasons of the unification nationalism.

Third is separation nationalism. This typology involves the disintegration of existing sovereign states and forming of ‘autonomous’ nationalisms appearing in many states.

Fourth is liberation nationalism. These are considered liberal nationalist movements.

Lastly is renewal nationalism. It occurs as part of a process of creating a new state identity which attempts to redefine the relations of the state to the world-economy.

Conclusions

Nationalism is one of the most important factors in world-systems analysis. It defines where we put our primary political loyalty; and that is in the nation-state. Today the world is divided and defined by nationalism and nations-state.

The evolution since its birth of nationalism and the development of the state-centric world-systems are intimately intertwined. States have not always existed. Neither has nationalism. To the contrary, both are relatively modern phenomena. It is also important to note that nationalism has not reached the end of its evolution and even the evolution of the typologies themselves. It continues to change. Understanding the historical dynamics of the typologies of nationalism would help evaluate current status and value of the current world-economy.

Nationalism has promoted democracy, self-determinism, economic growth, and socio-politico-economic diversity and experimentation.

Taking nationalism’s history and typology into account would help in the emergence of the future world-systems.