Nationalism: Prior to a Political Community

In the twentieth century, different unions, such as United Nations, European Union and Association of Southeast Asian Nations, gave birth to globalization which is, as most hyperglobalists say, a threat to nationalism. This broke the power of nationalism to unify a nation in most aspects, particularly political, in as much as external regimes have already the ability to influence decisions of the government even at a distance. Thus, this paper tries to explain the significance of nationalism in a political community through evidences from history and some political analysis.

Many still try to explain the definition of nationalism, whether it is seen in a cultural or political community. Yet, the entirety of this paper would mean nationalism in the context of a political community as what most of the modern states claim to be. 

Andrew Heywood, in his work Politics, defined nation as a group of people who are bound together primarily by shared citizenship, regardless of their cultural, ethnic, and other loyalties (p.113). And, citizenship, according to Webster dictionary, is “a membership to a city, state, or nation” and so, being under an authority. Meanwhile, Benedict Anderson also portrayed a nation as an “imagined community “. This means, that the more people are able to imagine that they are members of this community, the stronger the nationalism. Wikipedia also defined nationalism as “a strong identification of a group of individuals with a political entity defined in national term,… or that multinationality in a single state should necessarily comprise the right to express and exercise national identity even by minorities.” (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nationalism)

Combining the above definitions, we can say that a nation is a group of people imagining a membership to a political community led by an authority, and nationalism is the feeling of that membership or identification. Therefore, the nation is the product of nationalism and the foundation of the political organization. 

Centuries ago, politics in several countries were not well - established because of the presence of colonialism and iron-fist rulers like Oliver Cromwell of Great Britain and Adolf Hitler of Germany. People within the same territory had undefined political beliefs that citizenship and sovereignty were hardly conceptualized. The proceeding histories will provide evidences to prove that nationalism was already used by several nations to stabilize a political community (sources from Wikipedia the Free Encyclopedia). 

The famous idea of the history of nationalism was traced back to the French Revolution in 1789. The French people demanded for liberty, equality and fraternity and so, trying to establish a political community that would label them as equal French citizens (as long as you live there) with loyalty to the French state. A one nation, one belief, and one stable political community were achieved as this strong loyalty to the right authority was brought up. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/French_Revolution)

 Another historical account that supported the importance of nationalism was the Indian independence. Because of the strong desire of the Indians, motivated by Mohandas Gandhi, to take a citizenship as Indians and not English slaves or untouchables, they achieved their independence on 1947. Almost the same thing happened in Saudi Arabia, Turkey, Persia, Philippines and Egypt.

Nationalism also played a significant role in the creation and stability of Western and European states. Through it the following was attained: Italian, British and German unification, Russian modernization, and the United States’ preservation of union (by civil wars).

However, some see it as a hindrance especially when the history of Germany is being taken into account. But, let us first consider the nationalism that Hitler claimed to have as a reason to drive away the German Jews. As we know, it was Hitler who claimed that Jews were the enemies of the Aryans. Hence, it was his own way of expressing his identity and not as a whole. It just happened that he was the leader of Germany during that time so he was able to command that brutal rule. It is not the true nationalism because, based on its concept, he just expressed an identity but not as group of individuals. Hitler’s so called “nationalism” was selfish and subjective that it even deteriorated the peace of their political community. 

To clarify, one thing in contemporary period that can hinder political community, as mentioned earlier, is globalization. It robs the nationalism of the citizens. When other nations attempt to invade the other, by means like cultural and economic globalization, the citizens from the latter gradually lose their identity as members of that certain nation for they try to adapt other’s influences and characters. 

By these accounts, we have shown that a nation is a political community where citizenship is regardless of ethnicity, religion and suchlike criteria. The more people desire to achieve identification as part of the nation which they feel they belong, the more the tendency for nationalism to emerge. And, together, citizens build camaraderie for a common goal, choose a leader of the same nationality to whom they will obey with loyalty, and finally, establish a strong political community.  

Thus, nationalism is prior to a nation, to a state, to a political community. It is never a hindrance but a key to it.