Nationalism

Adolf Hitler and Nationalism Research Paper

September 21, 2021 by Essay Writer

Introduction

“The Great War was without precedent … never had so many nations taken up arms at a single time. Never had the battlefield been so vast… never had the fighting been so gruesome…”[1]

Historical records impute World War I to the first global catastrophe of the 20th century, which lasted from 1914 to 1918 and caused the approximate number of 9 million casualties. “It would turn out to be a long war in which soldiers died by the millions. An entire generation of young men would be wiped out. The war would also bring the downfall of the old European culture of kings and noblemen and their codes of honor.”[2]

However, neither the number of casualties at the battlefields could reflect the actual devastation reigning in the world hereafter, nor could the massive downfall of the imperial regimes. The economic dislocation and total disruption of values spread depression and fear among the countries that appeared to be the first in the victims’ rate.

The Germany’s irresistible enthusiasm of the Spirit of 1914 was buried under ashes, damages, and the first genocide of the 20th century. Nevertheless, it remained throughout the war and destruction as the leitmotif in the Adolf Hitler’s activity. The perspective young leader, having bravely withstood the battles of the Great War, even more bravely started to defend the rights of German workers, slowly, but convincingly acquiring the audience of support.

Hitler was persistent and industrious in approaching the wheel of Germany’s government. Finally, on becoming the chief of the state, Hitler has almost completely changed the vector of his policy and became the dictator of the German nation. However, the fact of being severely criticized and regarded as a hypocrite, racist, and insane did not hinder the existence of the belief that Hitler appeared to be the one to lead Germany to renaissance, both economic and spiritual.

Hitler fostered the idea of nationalism through forcing the population of Germany to work above norm for the sake of the country. This inducement was reasonably spiced with the talks about Aryan nation, uniqueness, and leadership, which altogether brought to the common belief in collective force, and, despite the resistance, impelled the Germans to work qualitatively and quantitatively.

The chief of the state encouraged collective consciousness, for, in comparison with individualism, this was the simplest way to control and direct the national mood. He infused German people with hope and dignity, with desire to enormous work for the common good and prosperity of own country. Indeed, what would be called ‘nationalism’, if not this?

Hitler’s Beginnings

Born in the 1800’s, Adolf Hitler spent most of his childhood dreaming of becoming a great artist. However, the pointless efforts had brought him to the depression, which added up to his hysteric nature greatly. “The utter misery of his poverty also deeply influenced Hitler. He adopted a harsh, survivalist mentality, which left little room for consideration of kindness and compassion – an attitude that would stay with him until the end.”[3]

Indeed, later, when Adolf Hitler joined the Bavarian Regiment for participation in the Great War, his colleagues admitted the traits of devoted and thorough person. “For me, as for every German, there now began the greatest and most unforgettable time of my earthly existence.

Compared to the events of this gigantic struggle, everything past receded to shallow nothingness,” Hitler said in Mein Kampf.[4] Hitler was completely absorbed in the ideology of war and potential victory, which was the cause for further deep disillusion and depression. Hitler was prone to hysteric accusations of the alternative betrayers, most likely the objects of Hitler’s anti-Semitic character, Jews.

“He had a curious but academically untrained mind and examined the complex philosophical works of Nietzsche, Hegel, Fichte, Treitschke and the Englishman, Houston Stewart Chamberlain. Hitler picked up bits and pieces of philosophy and ideas from them and wound up with a hodgepodge of racist, nationalistic, anti-Semitic attitudes that over time became a die-hard philosophy, later to be described in his book, Mein Kampf.”[5]

After the war ended, Hitler returned home and joined the workers association known as the National Social German. As an active member, he was incredibly instrumental in fighting for the rights of workers and spearheading for change.

Meanwhile, the consequences of the Great War manifested themselves in Versailles Treaty, which constituted the Armistice signed in November, 1918. The Treaty was extremely disadvantageous for Germany, which could be outlined in terms of territory, financial coverage, and military forces.

The conclusions of the document cultivated anger and disillusion among the population of Germany, for, in addition to the economy downfall due to loss of profitable regions, Germany has admitted its responsibility for the war damages. Hence, according to this acknowledgement, Germany was obliged to provide financing of all the war-caused damages of European countries.

In 1920, Hitler came up with a controversial 25-point program, a detailed demands list given to the government for immediate action. However, the government never took any action on this matter, and, overwhelmed by anger and frustrations, Hitler staged a coup to overthrow the government. This resulted in his imprisonment, whereby he served nine months of his five-year term. However, while in prison, he took advantage of his free time to design his manifesto.

Free time contemplations gave birth to ‘Mein Kampf’, which is partly autobiographical and partly political work by Adolf Hitler. The book encloses the formation of the writer’s outlook through the lenses of events happening to him starting up from early childhood. The author relates the premises to Jew despise and smoothly switches to the discussion of the forms of government, analyzing advantages and disadvantages of different ones. The book acquired popularity short after Hitler got the position at the governing structures.

Hitler and World War II

After the sudden death of Hindenburg, Adolf Hitler became president and Chancellor of Germany.[6] This marked the beginning of his dictatorial term in office. He began implementing his policies, which included the elimination of trade unions, racism against the Jews and curtailing freedom of speech.

By Hitler, the collective consciousness could foster nationalism through “homogenous ethnicity, cultural similarity and common purpose is the glue to the German society. Thus when a state is composed of a singular ethnic population, the natural inertia of such a population will hold the institution together and maintain its existence through thick and thin in a longer period. Even if the government had been badly managed and continuous maladministration, as long as the same population built it upon it will continue to work.”[7]

On observing the destruction of the country in the post-war period, which spread depression and disillusion among the society, Hitler’s preconceptions on nationalism became even more radical. He aspired to raise the social force, suppressed by the Versailles Treaty, in order to withstand the shock of the period together, feel the sense of community and belonging.

Hitler’s concept of nationalism considered either the idea of anti-Semitism, due to Hiller’s belief in complete fault of Jews concerning the collapse of German Empire. Consequently, Hitler proclaimed the supremacy of Aryans, dismantling the existence of the representatives of other nations, especially Jews. Hitler believed in breeding of people and more specifically the Aryan race; he highly discouraged interracial marriages, because he termed them as degrading the Aryan race.

He believed that there was no other human race, superior to the Aryans. He even discouraged any form of sexual relationships between the Aryans and any other race, especially the Jews. The belief in Aryan’s superiority was the main motive guiding Hitler to invade the territories of other countries to expand own territories, which has, actually, been one of the main reasons to the outburst of the World War II.

On stating that nation’s restoration and revival cannot occur without total devotion of its representatives, Hitler developed the ideology of Nazism, the radical embodiment of nationalism. “Our Nation is not just an idea in which you have no part; you yourself support the nation; to it you belong; you cannot separate yourself from it.”

Indeed, with his own example Hitler has shown his inextricable link with his country and devotion to ideology. His speeches were based on the constant reminding that sense of life of the Germans is their country. “Nazism was based on the belief that one should be deeply devoted, loyal and faithful to one’s nation”.[8] Hitler has proved the words of the national anthem and practically applied the idea implied there.

Indeed, the Germans felt strength and incredible endurance to restore the country at first and to dedicate everything for the nation’s sake and to feel this mythical ‘oneness’ in identification of oneself with the country. The thoroughly fostered idea of superiority and justice in treatment lead the German nation to committing the crime of infringing upon other territories and inducing the Word War II. Hence, Hitler is considered to be among the prime causes of the Second World War, when he decided to invade Poland, in 1939.[9]

Nevertheless, Hitler has developed a powerful ‘identity campaign’ and has become a symbol not only in the Germany’s history of his reign, but in the history of all times. He remained a scar on the world’s face, which has the form of wide-known swastika. Adolf Hitler has become the symbol of totalitarianism and dictatorship. He has performed radical forms of government and brought German nation to obedience through rough qualities.

“Brutality is respected. Brutality and physical strength. The people need wholesome fear. Why babble about brutality and be indignant about tortures? The masses want that. They need something that will give them a thrill of horror. Terror is the most effective political instrument.” – Adolf Hitler.[10]

The reference managed by Adolf’s friend August Kubizek proves that personal characteristics corresponded to the potential ideological fulfillment:

“The most outstanding trait in my friend’s character was…the unparalleled consistency in everything that he had said and did. There was in his nature something firm, inflexible, immovable, obstinately rigid, which manifested itself in his profound seriousness and was at the bottom of all his other characteristics.”[11]

The traits listed above were the perfect environment for the points of ideology to be realized with certainty and dedication. Hence, Hitler is known as the ever known severest leader, for the name of his is blemished with the blood of millions of people either killed in was or repressed for the reason of some personal Hitler’s preferences and concepts.

The posture of Adolf Hitler, nevertheless associates with the perfect leaderships skills and the outstanding oratory capacity, which is still being studied and followed at the modern times. The knowledge of how to govern the society so that it becomes obedient involves the requirement of a range of characteristics, such as being a psychologist and strategist.

However, one may not state that Adolf Hitler was manipulating the German society. Generally, he was manipulated by the ideology, which caused the chain effect of willingness to lead the whole country under the banner of Nazism.

It was vital for Hitler to focus on the people because he believed that, by ruling the people, he would also gain control over the industries and financial institutions. This way he would lead the country better than when he imposed rules and regulations on industries and financial institutions.

He knew that, in the end, he was the final person, when it came to making essential decisions. Hitler had an excellent manifesto, where he regarded all citizens equal regardless of their background. He further believed that the interests of an individual should never be in contradiction with the interests of the people. Individuals worked for the good of the whole community by putting their differences aside.

Before Adolf Hitler came into power, the German government stood for international reliance.[12] However, Hitler sharply opposed this idea; he wanted economic independence for Germany. Hitler aimed at bringing equality in consumption and production of commodities. He also managed to shun corruption, which was so eminent throughout the government.

Thus, being the symbol of a centralized power, Adolf Hitler has performed the excellent leadership skills, which include enthusiasm, professionalism, and, despite the firm emotionless nature, the passionate belief in the ideology of the Nazi party.

Hitler’s Demise

Exactly the Hitler’s passionate belief has served the impetus for the German nation to revive throughout the enormous damages of the Great War, the dreadful obligations according to the Versailles Treaty, the moods of anger and depression reigning in the consciousness of society. This was Adolf Hitler to raise the latter from its knees and, through outstanding diligence, withstand the period of destruction with dignity.

As a result, before the World War II Germany became one of the most developed countries of the world, where all of spheres of human activity advanced in investigations and even outperformed the countries, which were the least to suffer from the consequences of the Great War. Hence, one may consider that, together with the constant assertion of the supremacy of Aryans, Hitler has steeled the German nation so that it was able to face any conditions for the sake of country’s development.

Many individuals, however, viewed Hitler as a hypocrite, since he frequently did not keep his word. After he got into power, he disregarded some of the 25-point program policies and decided to act on his own way of thinking. Hitler could be either viewed a nationalist at some point, since some of the principles he stood for. For instance, he hated rich capitalist who accumulated a lot of wealth from the people.

The Nazi party of Adolf Hitler did not support exploitation of the common person.[13] Instead, it shunned capitalism and blamed the government for all the oppression of the people. Adolf Hitler fought for the rights of the workers before he became president. He gained accreditation in his efforts of being against capitalism and oppression of the workers, and kept this position throughout his life.

However, the last events of the World War II cut the assuredness in the ideology of the Nazi party. The final battle in Berlin would appear the one to end military operations. This was the first time Adolf Hitler admitted defeat, analyzing realistically the situation of the state. However, Hitler has blamed this defeat majorly on the generals. Being aware of potential capture, Hitler decided on committing suicide through gun shooting and purchasing poison.

Conclusion

Adolf Hitler is a controversial personality and his ‘legacy’ is quite ambiguous. His posture is known all over the world and he is frequently accepted through the prism of national stereotypes the society establishes. The historical records show only the figures and factual information and the critical thinker is the one to analyze the activity of the German Fuehrer.

There is a wide variety of aspects, according to which it is possible to conduct an investigation into the premises and consequences of Hitler’s actions. This paper considers the interconnection between the ideology of nationalism and the activities of Adolf Hitler. This work is dedicated to analyzing the responsibility of the German leader in spreading nationalistic conceptions on the post-war and during the World War II stages.

Generally, Adolf Hitler succeeded in renovation of the devastated German society in the period after the Great War. Through diligence and dedication he performed an excellent example of a leader, who rescued the country from the extremely complicated position, and bred dignity and unity in the masses of German society.

Footnotes

  1. Winter, J. & Baggett, B, (1997) The Great War, And the Shaping of the 20th Century
  2. The history Place. Hitler in World War 1: The Rise of Adolf Hitler. Web.
  3. The history Place. Hitler is Homeless in Vienna: The Rise of Adolf Hitler. Web.
  4. Hitler, A Mein Kampf. Web.
  5. The history Place. Hitler is Homeless in Vienna: The Rise of Adolf Hitler. Web.
  6. Rice, E. (2005). Adolf Hitler and Nazi Germany. North Carolina, NC: Morgan Reynolds.
  7. Hitler, A Mein Kampf. Web.
  8. Koenigsberg, R, Nationalism, Nazism, and Genocide, Online Publication Date: 26-Oct-2005.
  9. Haugen, B. (2006). Adolf Hitler: Dictator of Nazi Germany. Minneapolis, MN: Compass Point Books.
  10. Hitler, A Mein Kampf. Web.
  11. The history Place. Hitler is Homeless in Vienna: The Rise of Adolf Hitler. Web.
  12. Nicholls, D. (2000). Adolf Hitler: a biographical companion. California, CA: ABC-CLIO.
  13. Pane, L. (2011). Education in Nazi Germany. New York, NY: Berg.
Read more

Anarchy, Black Nationalism and Feminism Analytical Essay

September 21, 2021 by Essay Writer

“Anarchists Against Terrorism”. In this site, there is criticism of terrorist methods that are common with anarchists as a means of meeting their political aspirations. The most contradictory thing is that this website is owned and run by anarchists. As such, the site seeks to “defend” anarchism by claiming that anarchists are not terrorists and instead the state is responsible for terrorist acts.

The site acknowledges that anarchism has been associated with violence and therefore the site is meant to enlighten both anarchists and the public on this misconception. The author of this site has gone ahead to cite ways in which propaganda has been spread associating anarchism with terrorism. For instance, it has been cited that the relatedness of anarchy and terrorism has been propagated by the media and schools among other ways.

“Black InterNationalism”. This site is dedicated to addressing the issue of Black Nationalism. In essence, the author of the site contends a common misunderstanding that Black Nationalism is a disguised way of enhancing Black supremacy.

As such, the objective is to distance Black Nationalism with other forms of nationalism that have been characterized by oppression and humiliation of others. To show that the aspect of Black nationalism is to acknowledge the African identity in all aspects, various highlights on prominent Black Nationalists such as Martin Luther King Jr. Marcus Garvey and Henry M. Turner among others have been provided.

To assert the need for promoting Black Nationalism, the authors of this site mention the case of Sanger who sought to engineer human beings genetically in 1939 as a way of eliminating the Negroes among other groups of people such as religious leaders. In short, the site seeks to enlighten the Blacks on their achievements and putting an air of pride on being Africans.

“Feminism and Women’s Studies” the site is dedicated to promoting the female gender on issues such as gender, women’s health, women’s studies and feminism activism among other topics. From this site, one can be able to connect with the aspect of feminism and how this is being utilized in the world to impact the world through various ways.

One can also be able to connect to other websites that address the field of feminism especially the study of feminism. These include links to university program that are helpful in understanding the topic. Women’s studies have been particularly highlighted from a historical point of view to the modern aspects of feminism in the workplace and the society at large. This site is undoubtedly all about women and their welfare.

The best site in terms of presenting its position is the Black Internationalism site. This is because the site candidly shows the need to appreciate all humans regardless of their race. Though named as Black Internationalism site, the site has not only highlighted the plights of Africans but also those of other nationalities such as the Hispanics.

Every claim made in support of Black Nationalism has been supported by evidence and of the need to promote Black nationalism. For instance, the idea of combating “planned parenthood” has been linked Sanger’s case of 1939 where he intended to eliminate the “inferior” races. Finally, this site acts as a celebration of men and women who have traded their lives for the equality of human race as portrayed by the citing of most nationalist activists who ever existed.

References

Blackened. (2000). Anarchists against terrorism. Web.

Black Internationalism. (2010). Black internationalism. Web.

Feminism and Women’s Studies. (2010). Feminism and women’s studies. Web.

Read more

Religious hypocrisy in Dublin and Nationalism Research Paper

September 21, 2021 by Essay Writer

Initially published in 1914, Dublin collects 15 short stories all Written by James Joyce. Virtually all the stories carry a bulky reflection of the middle class life encounters in the beginning years of the 20th century in Ireland around Dublin. Coincidentally, around this time Ireland was undergoing intensive process of nationalism awareness.

Consequently, the process of searching for a common national identity was at the peak. Various ideas coupled with influences afflicted the much-needed balance between culture and history. It is in these contexts that perhaps the Joyce’s perceptions of epiphany: a period within which some certain characters become illuminated, forms an essential trait of all the short stories contained in Dublin.

The initial stories in the larger extent reflect children protagonists. The latter stories, however, progress to address stories of gradually older people indicative of transitory stages of life: childhood, adolescence and later maturity. It is argued in the paper that stage of life of an individual is a key determiner of an individual’s perceptions of nationalism. The concern of this paper is, however, on children protagonist stories: The Encounter and The Sisters.

National symbols are significant for young people to ape from in pursuits of inculcation of nationalism spirit. However, reading The Sisters, from Dublin creates a different impression. In fact, The Sisters present tantalizing mysteries. As Benstock argues, the priest is in near state of mind breakdown as he is in the verge of losing the faith that he proclaimed in the church (32).

In this context, it stands out significant to argue that church give rise to a dangerous corrosive force. The short story provides a literary comparison of father Flynn and a boy whose name is widely not mentioned. The priest, having being relieved of the noble tasks of priesthood, acts as the mentor of the boy. The story onsets initiates by reflections of flashbacks of a boy who attempts to come into terms with illness and demise of father Flynn.

As Norris puts it, borrowing from the “flashbacks and memories scattered through the story, Father Flynn is shown to have been an intellectual priest strong religious vocation, but unable to cope with the mundane daily routine of being a parish priest – which finally led to his collapse” (Norris Suspicious readings of Joyce’s Dubliners 12).

The boy, being the narrator of the story, is an admirer of farther Flynn and closely profiled his traits and advices. However, the boy later feels immense pity coupled with guilt for not having checked on him as his days neared to end.

From the child’s environment, father Flynn is depicted in the short story as a hero and a likely vessel for propulsion of positive qualities of a real nationalist. Nevertheless in the adulthood environment: which is concealed from the narrator, father Flynn emerges as a complete failure.

As Benstock reckons, “his death is regarded with relief… considered to have been a miserable example from which the boy must be preserved” (33). His death consequently, widely curtails the extension and imitation of destructive influences to the society: erosion of religious values coupled with lose of faith.

The boy contemplates the word “gnomon” in relation to “paralysis” and “simony”. This depicts the story as reflective of priesthood approaches of the East from which father Flynn defers. In this context, “gnomon” stands out as, not just a symbol erosion of faith, but also forecast that young people under mentorship of people like father Flynn are likely to have Eastern influences (Norris Suspicious readings of Joyce’s Dubliners 104).

Joyce, despite being born in a strong Christian religious catholic family remained as a pessimist of religious hypocrisy. Through The Sisters, it is perhaps evident that Joyce advocates the replacement of religious values as they relate to the determination of peoples role models by liberal and intellectual mentors. This being the way forward to achievement of a subtle state of nationalism widely sort by Ireland in the early twentieth century.

Joyce extended the theme of religious battles to The Encounters from The Sisters. Somewhat similar to The Sisters, The Encounters” is also narrated a by a boy. The boy and his friend go to seek adventure in the shores. The boy claims, “The mimic warfare of the evening became at last as wearisome to me as the routine of school in the morning because I wanted real adventures to happen to myself.

But real adventures, I reflected, do not happen to people who remain at home: they must be sought abroad” (Bloom 38). In this context, the story brings into the lime light the people’s perception about external influences in the definition of their nationalism with what Ireland was battling.

The larger concern of the short story is based on a trip. Through the trip, the boy encounters numerous social events. Although he is at an early phase of his life, he can come into terms with some of the situations that involved segregation and subdivision of the national population into distinct groups. As a way of exemplification, some boys “are mistaken for Protestants by local children” (Norris Dubliners: Authoritative Text, Contexts, Criticism 258).

The boy narrator also appreciates that he notices that some children were enormously poor and “ragged”. Arguably, church retained hypocrisy by the fact that they acerbated the perception that by belonging to a differing religious denomination makes people different from their counterparts, yet they live in one nation. The feeling of oneness is also from another dimension impaired by the economic and social disparities in The Encounter.

While religious leaders in The Sisters are depicted as being insubordinate influences to young people, in The Encounters, on the other hand, old people who are supposed to act as the mentors of young people are pinpointed as being a real source of counterfeit influences. When the boy and his friend Mahoney decides to go exploring Dublin and fails to get anything funny they encounter an old man. As the story unfolds, the old man is an ideal sexual pervert.

The man exposes enormous sexual fantasies to the boy who does not know that such things existed. As a repercussion, the boy gets so frightened. “At one point, the man excuses himself, and it is implied that he touches himself before returning to the boys” (Norris Dubliners: Authoritative Text, Contexts, Criticism 301). However, there is no explicit textual proof provided to deduce that the man engages in masturbation. This perhaps extends the Joyce’s use of the gnomon as evidenced in many of her short stories.

In conclusion, Joyce’s short stories that utilize the children protagonists give the feeling that old people serve within the society as corrupt influences to the young people. Those who are supposed to mentor them introduce religious prejudices, hypocrisy and undue social behavior to children at an early age.

Dublin tales present a society struggling to establish a harmonizing environment for religious differences like protestant and catholic violence, blazing Irish poverty and other discriminatory perceptions. Arguably, these constitute substantial impediments to perceptions of nationalism by the virtue that they erode the spirit of national unity.

Works Cited

Benstock, Bernard. “The Sisters and the Critics.” James Joyce Quarterly 4.1(1966): 32–35. Print.

Bloom, Harold. James Joyce’s Dubliners. New York: Chelsea House, 1988. Print.

Norris, Margot. Dubliners: Authoritative Text, Contexts, Criticism. New York: Norton, 2006. Print.

Norris, Margot. Suspicious readings of Joyce’s Dubliners. Pennsylvania: University of Pennsylvania press, 2003. Print.

Read more

GCC Nationalism Essay

September 21, 2021 by Essay Writer

Even though a nation has been viewed for a long time through the prism of its heritage, as well as its contribution to the rest of the world, it seems that a new approach of evaluating a nation is soon coming into full force – a country and a nation is soon going to be represented by its existing sub-communities, which means that no imagined tradition is going to be a part of a nation’s image.

As it has been noted by King Abdallah in his Saudi Arabian National Dialogue, a state – or a kingdom, for that matter – is going to be represented as a mixture of the existing communities.

Hence, the kingdom was to incorporate such communities as Shia, such parties as Liberal Reformers and such issues as the rates of unemployment and gender concerns. Judging by the fact that the concerns above were raised meant that the national integrity of the state was threatened, especially in the light of the conflict between the USA and Iraq.

Still going on, the conflict which was further referred to as the ‘Saudi national debate’ has transcended the boundaries of critiquing the political issues in the state and has become the voice of the national dissatisfaction with the country’s policies, which poses a threat to the current religious situation, as well as the relationships with Al-Saud.

Developing into a debate concerning the national identity, the above-mentioned issue has become quite a problem in the countries of the Gulf Cooperation Council. Spiced with the complicacies within the society and economy of the GCC states, as well as a number of existential problems, the issue of national identity has been blown out of proportions, which the leaders of Iran and the rest of the Gulf States have recently admitted.

Even with the results of the economic crisis of 2008, which has made it possible to level up the demographic issues, the economic tendencies in the GCC countries remain the same. It must be admitted, though, that the decay of economics has allowed people to see the political impotence of the heads of the countries, as well as the inconsistency of their social contract policies; apart from Bahrain, the policies of the GCC countries leave much to be desired.

Still, it is necessary to mention that the national integrity of the GCC countries is not going to disappear completely – there are still certain cultural, political and ethnical specifics which will never be washed away by the sands of time.

Indeed, the phenomenon of national identity is built of some concepts tracing which will require going back in history before the GCC states became independent. It is essential to mention, however, that one of the main standpoints at which the national identity of the peoples of the GCC states was formed was liberation of Riyadh in 1902, which followed the memorable fight in the Masmak fortress.

It is remarkable, though, that the given event was not considered as the liberation of the people who inhabited Riyadh – the residents of the latter remained under the control of the dominating nation. Therefore, it can be considered that the Riyadh liberation was instead an event of religious significance than the one of political importance for both the rebellious unitarians, or the Wahhabis, and their opponents.

As soon as the Independent Kingdom of Saudi Arabia was formed in 1914 and Ibn Saud, the former leader of the kingdom, was considered a perfect candidate for the position of the magistrate of Najd, the leaders of other Arabian countries, or, to be more exact, the rulers of Qatar, Kuwait and Bahrain, were chosen to play the Ottoman role since 1870s.

Among the rest of the changes which have been made to the Arabian countries which have been finally liberated, the aegis of the British Empire should be mentioned; however, the latter did not score well in the realm of the Arabian world – Muwahhidon’s attacks took their toll on the future GCC states. Nevertheless, the Gulf countries were still ready to start their consolidation; carried out in XVIII-XIX centuries, the given process allowed for the development of the national identity of the Arabian people.

Before the oil production was turned into the critical means of growing finances for the countries which are nowadays referred to as the GCC, tribal leaders had built secure connections with the British Empire, since the latter provided sufficient help from the newly appeared countries. However, the fact that the nations mentioned above are still very young means that what is referred to as the ‘imagination of tradition’ is a rather half-baked idea.

Even though the Arabian society of the present-day world is not as homogenous as it used to be, the anonymity of belonging to a specific nation, culture or state defines the modern civilized society, which means that the Arabian countries have to reconsider their idea of emphasizing national identity. Since even the people supporting the idea of an ‘imagined political community have very vague ideas of it, it will be more appropriate for the GCC countries not to turn their sense of national identity into radical nationalism.

Read more

Nationalism’s Opposing Meanings Research Paper

September 21, 2021 by Essay Writer

Introduction

The principle of nationalism remains complex due to various viewpoints, which have emerged to define it. This means that nationalism is not an easy discipline. We can attribute this complexity to different meanings people have attached to the concept of nationalism. Nationalism may present opposing views on a single subject. For instance, we may use nationalism as unifying or disintegrating factor.

This paper attempts to demonstrate moral transparency of nationalism due to its ability to accommodate two opposing views, for instance, evil and good. Significantly, the benchmark ideas most nationalists proclaim in order to advance their nations relate to justice or lack of justice.

Still, rights have other underlying moral claims to signify that rights themselves are not because of nationalism. From historical perspectives, we have to acknowledge that nationalism has never existed as a single and unadulterated idea. Instead, history shows that the term exists as a mixture alongside other concepts like conservatives, liberalism, and radicalism nationalism. Moreover, there are different types of nationalism, such as civic, ethnic, and cultural.

This essay maintains that interpretation and the manner nationalism relates with other factors and ideas are significant than its pure ideology. This analysis concurs with past studies, which indicate that nationalism is a post-modernity concept and socially constituted.

Function and Origin of Nationalism

Ernest Gellner was a prominent scholar in nationalism. He argues that economic transformation needs cultural uniformity. Gellner notes that nationalism emanates from the demand for cultural homogeneity and availability of state machinery to support it. In his view, Agrarian consists of overlapping factors like ethnic, linguistic, religious, political, and cultural factors.

The system established a chain of demands, for instance, industrialism needed uniformity of high cultures. This led to the demand for the education system. The education system created a state, which later demanded nationalism. This shows that state emanated from demands of industrial society. However, factors like economic interests, liberalism, and education could not create or shape a state on their own as Imagined Communities.

After Gellner in 1983, the first edition of Imagined Communities appeared. In this publication, Anderson referred to the constructed nature of culture and the role of print capitalism in nationalism. Anderson looked at cultural aspects and noted that pre-natural culture consisted of religious culture.

Nations emerged and took over their distinctive and constructed national cultures. Anderson puts much emphasis on the role of print capitalism. He noted that print capitalism established the foundation of new nations by developing systems of new national cultures.

The first Industrial Revolution led to the creation of new social, economic, and political thoughts. There were massive changes including market needs and the advent of the steam power. These demands led to developments in infrastructures that opened and increased urban networks.

These factors led to migration to urban centers. In cities, people demarcated their groups with differences in economic statuses. Industrialization transformed social structures of Western Europe as people began to define themselves with emerging technology and various ways of production.

This led to the rise of liberalism, nationalism, conservatism, and socialism ideologies. Class systems like proletariat, working class, and bourgeois emerged with different economic strengths. These social structures expressed diverse views on issues. For instance, bourgeoisie of Britain advocated for liberalism. This ideology promoted the idea of individualism and the recognition of individual rights.

They believed in constitutionalism and limited power of the government under a written constitution. However, liberals believed that property qualification was an appropriate tool of restricting the right to vote. In other words, only privileged property owners, businesspersons, and professionals could vote. Therefore, liberals represented the middle and upper classes and disregarded the lower class.

Nationalism and liberalism in Europe shared common factors. Nationalists wanted constitutional government and free of external control and tyranny. They expressed their ideas through art, literature, or music. Different nations approached nationalism by using various strategies. For instance, French preferred revolution as Germans expressed strong cultures to reflect national identity. In addition, Italy promoted national unity.

Germany also advocated for national unity, but the unification acted as conservative agenda. However, conservatives noted that change was inescapable. Thus, they compromised and assimilated some liberal ideologies. However, some conservatives like Klemens von Metternich maintained their support for traditional monarchy and political institutions.

Marx and Engels noted that the first Industrial Revolution also created socialist movement. According to Marx and Engel, socioeconomic structures like capitalism oppressed the working and lower classes. They argued for state-owned means of production and distribution. According to them, humankind history consisted of unending class struggle in which various classes replaced existing ones. For instance, Europe experienced three replacements, namely, kingly, aristocratic, and bourgeoisie.

After this, the working class shall takeover power. However, the process shall involve violence. Socialists’ main concern is the welfare of the entire society. We can conclude that the first Industrial Revolution led to new political ideologies. Thus, we can credit industrialization with the end of feudalism and aristocracy of the early Europe.

Revolutions across Europe, 1848-1850

In 1848, there was a widespread revolution in Europe because of political unrest, which resulted from rising food prices. This period also marked the increased demand for change by the working class. In addition, most ethnic communities of Europe started to fight for boundaries in order to reflect their ethnic uniformity.

The French Revolution of 1848 started as a struggle between the Parisian laborers and the Monarchy government. The Revolution attracted the National Guard, the militia, and a section of the army. The working class advocated for constitutional reforms across Austria and Prussia.

Revolutions of 1848 rocked political balance of Europe. However, these revolutions did not produce the desired results. Consequently, politicians used their newly acquired power to create powerful states.

France

Napoleon III assumed office in 1851 and 1852. These periods marked the start of dictatorship and emperor respectively. He created economic growth that led to increase in demands for French products. France established private banks, invested in railways, and rebuilt Paris.

The rebuilt center of the city only served the bourgeoisie. In this case, the poor only concentrated in city suburbs. France engaged in unsuccessful foreign missions. For instance, it declared war on Russia and supported Italian nationalists’ revolt against Austria. However, these activities had limited results, but they did not hurt the country.

Napoleon promoted a free-trade policy with the Great Britain and opened the Suez Canal. The French involvement in Mexico led to the failure of the emperor. The Franco-Prussian War led to the failure of the French army, which eventually led to the downfall of Napoleon Empire.

Germany

Otto von Bismarck aimed to preserve German unity. His approach involved realpolitik. Realpolitik ensured that the leader pursued national interests at all costs. Bismarck joined liberals and conservatives in a bid to secure a national unity. Bismarck opposed Austria as ambassador to the German Confederation between 1851 and 1859. Bismarck’s main aim was to build Prussia’s strength and unite the power of Prussia. Bismarck strategically aligned his agenda with the forces of German nationalism with the aim of removing Austria from affairs of Germany.

When Bismarck assumed office, his speeches created scandals and sensation. For instance, he declared that the government would work without parliamentary approval. He also attacked the middle-class opposition. Bismarck changed the outlook of the army as Prussians expressed their dissatisfaction by sending many liberals to the parliament between 1862 and 1866.

Bismarck defended conservative ideologies and noted that liberals were not hostile to the authoritarian government. Bismarck thought that the event of 1848 changed the country. Therefore, he believed that German middle-class would be better under a conservative government than uncertain quest for liberal government.

According to Bismarck, conservative government would propagate a national unity of Prussians. The liberal majorities blocked Bismarck’s constitutional reform. However, after Germany defeated Austria, Bismarck advocated for a federal constitution for the new North Germany.

All states maintained their local systems of government. Like Napoleon III, Bismarck reached for middle and working classes. This approach led to favor of Bismarck among the middle-class. By 1866, Bismarck had realized his dream of unified Germany and allowed many people to take part in the national development. Bismarck also earned respects from the middle-class.

The Franco-Prussian War and its aftermath

In 1870, the Franco-Prussia war broke out due to French resistance to Prussian control. The Southern Germany joined Prussia according to plans of Bismarck in order to avert threats from French. Consequently, this war favored Prussia and a new German empire emerged at Versailles with a liberal constitution.

However, the government was still responsive to the ruling elites and other professionals. The unification led to the creation of one national market, financial system, and integrated national economies. This led to rapid industrialization.

The war came with devastating consequences to France because it had to pay massive compensation and give up the rich eastern Alsace and parts of Lorraine in favor of Germany. Germany went ahead to claim Alsace and strengthened its military base. However, French believed that captures of Alsace and Lorraine were acts of aggression and crime. This marked the beginning of a poor relationship between Germany and France.

The Franco-Prussian War created a feeling of patriotism among Germans as other critics equated the war to Darwinian idea of struggle for existence. Germans claimed of Bismarck’s genius, solidified army, and unity of the nation both during and after the war.

Germans glowed with success and considered themselves as the best in Europe. The war partially created authoritarian regime and new conservatism. This was mainly a coalition of the wealthy class with the active support of the working majority. The war also influenced World War I. It demonstrated that small armies would not win any war in the future. Thus, it was imperative to borrow the German system and create a Nation in Arms as witnessed later in Europe.

The Changing Face of Nationalism

Many scholars linked the first wave of nationalism to liberalism in the first half of the century. Herder, Mazzini, and other theorists believed that many nations would survive under liberal-democratic ideologies (Mazzini 278). However, in 1860s and 1870s, nationalism took a different course as many nationalists supported national power and pride rather than supporting the entire community. Nationalism gradually lost its liberal ideologies.

There was a strong sense of competition among nations, which also influenced foreign relations. The US and Germany became exceptional examples among other nations of Europe after 1870. England was the dominant power of the world, and it expressed its concerns by looking for allies.

This led to the Dual Alliance of Austria and Prussia in 1879, and later the Triple Alliance as Italy joined them in 1882. This period marked the end of the Reinsurance Treaty between Germany and Russia as Russia forged a coalition with France between 1890 and 1894.

According to Bismarck, Germany had achieved its desires. Thus, it would not engage in wars in order to acquire many colonies. In this respect, Germany did not interfere with the power balance in Europe between 1871 and 1890. However, Bismarck assisted other nations to balance power as they destroyed of Ottoman Empire.

Britain and other states consider Germany as a menace. This is because the country was difficult to predict because of militarism and expansionism. Still, Germany also had constant fears from its neighbor due to its geographical position.

The beginning of 20th century marked a period of enhanced anarchy. This was not the case when nationalism only rotated around kings and other institutions. In this period, there were few wars. However, in 19th century, the idea of nationalism changed its course as nationalism identified nations with people. Nationalism resulted into nations against nations involving all citizens as Mishkova indicated (Mishkova 103).

Before World War I, nations were so aggressive to the extent of considering a major war in any slightest provocation. In 19th century, rapid industrialization resulted into other problems like unfavorable working conditions, increased poverty, and displacement. Technology advancements also determined the nation’s ability to adapt to changes. This marked the movement against materialism, rationalism, positivism bourgeois society, and liberal democracy as Melancon and Swanson indicate (Melancon and Swanson 376).

Fin de siècle referred to a European-wide cultural movement. It showed that civilization and history were progressive in nature. The past was under constant attack. Right-wing politics emerged that encouraged tradition amidst quest for change and calls for radical social change. The situations created cultural pessimism and social tension in Europe (Weber 278).

Social Darwinism encouraged a proactive racial thought. We had racial sciences to establish biological links in generations as a form of verifying national identity. This changed nationalism from its liberal ideologies. In other words, it set the pace for racial discrimination leading to divisive scientific theory of eugenics.

The idea was to show that mixed race was a recipe for chaos. Racial hygiene reflected the idea of public health tied to heredity. However, nationalists created new nations in which unity of the state accommodated ethnic and regional differences. In addition, force was acceptable form diplomacy. This made violence and nationalism parts of modern nations.

Conclusion

This essay shows the two opposing meanings of nationalism. It shows various aspects of nationalism across many centuries in Europe and its connection with the political ideologies and democratization.

The paper captures significant elements of in history of Europe related to nationalism. These include liberalism, modernism, society, culture, ethnicity, individualism and nationalist, and the relationship between Europe and the rest of the world. In all, it shows that nationalism is not static, but changes with periods of history, attitude, and ideologies of the time.

Works Cited

Mazzini, Giuseppe. The Duties of Man and Other Essays. Lawrence, KS: Neeland Media, 2007. Print.

Melancon, Michael and John Swanson. Nineteenth Century Europe: Sources and Perspectives from History. New York: Pearson, 2007. Print.

Mishkova, Diana. “The Nation as Zadruga: Remapping Nation-Building in Nineteenth Century Southeast Europe.” Disrupting and Reshaping. Early Stages of Nation- Building in the Balkans. Ed. Franzinetti, Guido and Marco Dogo. Ravenna: Longo Editore, 2002. 103-115. Print.

Weber, Eugen. Peasants into Frenchmen: The Modernization of Rural France, 1870- 1914. Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1976. Print.

Read more

Nationalism as a Political Occurrence Essay

September 21, 2021 by Essay Writer

What is Nationalism?

Nationalism can be described as a political occurrence that can exist in several ways. Nationalism is continued by certain agents and is subject to many views. James Kellas described nationalism in international relations as an origin of crisis, an origin of resistance to the state system in existence, a resistance to international establishments, and an indicator of a country’s capability in regard to international affairs (43).

Nationalism has been variously interpreted to imply the creation and continuation of a state. Anthony Smith recognized five ways of using nationalism: the entire procedure of developing and preserving a nation; a source of sense of belonging and patriotism to the nation; symbolization to the nation; a political orientation of the nation, which includes cultural doctrines; a political and societal struggle for the achievement of national goals (181).

Nationalism could be considered a way of conduct or an ideology or both (Smith 4). In the sense of ideology, nationalism stands as a system of ideas normally requiring rights of self-governance. In this respect, nationalism declares the peculiarity of a certain nation and their right to rule themselves in their territory (Easman 28).

This classical description presumes that nationalism is based on the nation and the right of the nation to determine for itself in their homeland. However, the application of nationalism is mostly narrowed to the quest of nationhood where a particular nation moves to stand for a state that has chosen to be considered as politically disparate. This ideology has caused a movement for independence.

In another view, Walker Connor contends that nationalism is a matter of trueness and allegiance (42). In this regard, the ideology of nationalism is concerned with the faithfulness to the nation and how it’s several aspects of attributes and values can be preserved. Walker Connor supports the view of nationalism as a display of allegiance to the nation (42).

Hence, nationalism is not against a people’s loyalty to their state-nation. Small or large groups can be faithful to the laws of the state however be loyal to their premier identity source, which is their national or ethnic identity. This peculiarity is striking in countries having multinational states, as there is a distinction between the nation and the state.

Connor argues that nationalism is faithfulness and allegiance to the nation, whereas Easman contends that it is faithfulness and allegiance to the community. Hence, it can be seen that nationalism is a manifestation of what is termed “ethnic solidarity”. Ethnocentric attitudes as well as nationalist sentiments make up a vital aspect of nationalism. The way a nationalist behaves and its manner of consideration is strengthened and supported through “mechanisms of socialization” (Evans and Newnham 347).

A Brief Typology of Nationalism

In the analysis of the conditions in the presentation of nationalism, it can be seen that it basically explains certain aspects of nationalism. Even though it is generally accepted that research on nationalism is still far away from improving a desired typology or normative use. James Kellas gave three broad approaches that give a description of nationalism: state/official nationalism, ethnic nationalism, and civic/social nationalism (66).

Official nationalism is the state’s nationalism that covers all legal citizens, regardless of their ethnic origin and tradition (Kellas 67). This is the type of nationalism that is practiced by the citizens in the form of patriotism. There is a difference between official nationalism and other forms of nationalism in the sense that it is practiced by government authorities at the state level via internal policies.

Hence, nationalism is in this case, defined in regard to national interest. Therefore, state nationalism is based on patriotism to the nation and the intention of the citizens to affiliate the political status of the state with the nation. This makes the state a political entity that stands for the will of every citizen that also brings together their national allegiance and loyalty.

Ethnic nationalism represents the ideology and social movement of cultural groups that one of its priority goals is building a “nation-state” founded on their cultural heritage and other ethnic markers that reinforces a feeling of belonging to what the group consider a nation.

On another front, ethnic nationalism may be concentrated on sustaining the group’s “ethnic solidarity” and look forward to the preservation of its culture via district, ethnical and political self-governance inside a certain state. In this regard, the movement for the continuation of a cultural identity is perceived as a manifestation of an ethnic nationalism.

According to James Kellas, civic or social nationalism is the nationalism of a state that is determined by cultural and social affiliations instead of shared descent (66). In contrast to ethnic nationalism, civic or social nationalism has to do with “secondary community” instead of a “primary community” (Thompson 49).

In the civic or social nationalism, foreigners can take part in the group by adopting their culture and adjusting to the society. This type of nationality is one that is gotten by immigrants. The cultural or national groups are required to wholly incorporate the new nation and also comply with the nation’s standards, after the acquisition of citizenship.

Works Cited

Connor, Walker. Etnonacionalismo. Madrid: Trama Editorial, 1998. Print.

Easman, Milton J. Ethnic Politics. Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1994. Print.

Evans, Graham, and Jeffrey Newnham. The Penguin Dictionary of International Relations. New York: Penguin Books Ltd., 1998. Print.

Kellas, James G. The Politics of Nationalism and Ethnicity. 2nd ed. New York: St. Martin’s Press Inc., 1998. Print.

Smith, Anthony D. Structure and Persistence of Ethnic. Malden: Polity Press, 2003. Print.

Thompson, Richard H. Theories of Ethnicity. Westport: Greenwood Press, 1989. Print.

Read more

Rise and Development of Nationalism in East Asia Essay

September 21, 2021 by Essay Writer

Introduction

Nationalism means the identities that people have, which they view as distinguishing them uniquely as belonging to a particular nation. Thus, it covers one of the forms of patriotism. Several theories can be employed to provide an explanation of the origin of nationalism. The main ones are modernism and primordialist views.

Modernism theory considers nationalism as a recent societal process, which demands societal structuring for it to develop. On the other hand, the primordialist “describes nationalism as a reflection of the ancient and perceived evolutionary behavior of humans to organize themselves into distinct groupings based on the affinity of birth” (Tamir 13).

The paper uses the primordialist view. Based on the theory, nationalism may develop based on cultural artifacts defining people living within a given nation and political-related experiences in a nation among other things. From this point of view, this paper discuses the rise and development of nationalism in East Asia based on historic political related experiences and cultural elements including religion and clothing. Japan and china are used as the main examples in this quest.

Rise and Development of Nationalism in China and Japan

Cultural elements may act as mechanisms that can help to instill the perception of nationalism among people living within a common geographical area. Theses artifacts may be depicted through clothing, language, and religion.

With the onset of westernization, Chinese people encountered a dilemma whether to abandon their own clothing styles that defined their heritage and hence a sense of belonging as Chinese nationals or to adopt the rising western styles of dressing. This dilemma motivates Finnane to wonder what Chinese women deserve to wear for them to retain the symbol of nationalism (99).

Given the history of China that is rich in customs, the question is significant since resistance to the degradation of nationalism depicted by dressing style was evident as from 1949 when Mao Zedong declined from wearing black leather shoes and a suit. According to Finnane, the head of state argued, “we Chinese have our own customs…why should we follow others” (99).

This resistance was a replication of over half decade debates questioning the capacity of the western influences to impair the dressing codes of the Chinese people. Over that period, alterations of style were incredibly controversial. They attracted hefty public debates particularly when they involved the question of the women dress. The main interrogatives were whether the women dresses need to be long or short, tight or loose, or cover the arms for them to depict Chinese national women.

During the reign of Mao, the question on what Chinese people wore attracted superficial analysis. However, dressing styles and the type of clothes that were won by Chinese people acted as wonderful mechanisms of differentiating between China and the rest of the nations in the world.

In this line of thought, Finnane reinforces, “For politically correct Chinese people, clothing at that time differentiated the socialist elect from the rest…for outsiders, it was the single most obvious feature about contemporary Chinese culture” (100). Clothes were depictive of Chinese culture and hence a symbol of Chinese people.

Even though much of the concerns about the alteration of the dressing to have the capacity to erode the culture of the Chinese people concerned what women wore in the ninetieth century, the link between nationalism and the clothing was not only a problem of women: men were also equally worried. This argument is strengthened by the Mao Zedong’s rejection to wear a suit associated with the western culture.

Outside the Chinese context, clothing remains an important symbol of nationalism in other nations in the East Asia. For instance, in India, cladding in ‘sari’ represents a sovereign Indian woman because “the fertile ground for production of future generations both past and future-were embodied in her,” (Finnane 102).

On the other hand, in Japan, a woman dressed in ‘kimono’ profiles an ideal sovereign Japanese woman. From these examples, it sounds essential to infer that the perception of nationalism among people cannot be segregated from the cladding codes acceptable as representing the true national of a given nation because cultural artifacts are depictive of cultural differences among people who are often confined within different national boundaries.

Apart from the rise and development of nationalism from the context of dressing style, religion is yet another crucial cultural artifact that may help to build the perception of nationalism among different people living in different nations. For instance, in Japan, subscription to Shinto is perhaps an essential way of portraying ones strongly grounded spirit of nationalism.

Shinto assumed its shape upon the arrival of Buddhism. This was vital in helping to differentiate the new religion to the indigenous religion in Japan that was the representation of the ‘Japanese’.

Okuyama strengthens this point by further asserting, “Some 100,000 shrines of jinja served by Shinto priests attest to its physical presence nationwide” (94). Shinto defines the religious practices of the indigenous native Japanese to mean ‘the ways of ‘kami’ as opposed to ‘the ways of Buddha’.

Therefore, since the introduction of Buddhism in the 16th century, Shinto practices became definitive of the true Japanese nationalism. However, it is also crucial to note that Japanese people consider traditional customs as defining nationalism in spite of “whether they are Shinto or not” (Okuyama 97). The question that emerges is- to what extent do Japanese people perceive Shinto as a true representation of nationalism?

The response to the above question is perhaps well answered by considering the significance of Shinto shrines among all citizens of Japan including the nobles. In this regard, Okuyama reckons, “since he became the prime minister, Koizumi Jun’ichiro visited Yasukuni Shrine four times: 13 August 2001, 21 April 2002, 14 January 2003, and 1 January 2004” (106).

Nevertheless, even though this may be anticipated to be acceptable within the understanding of the traditional customs of Japanese people, the visits attracted opposition. Consequently, about seven lawsuits ensued as a result.

Nevertheless, Koizumi remained confident that the visits were necessary for a number of reasons. In the first place, the shrines served to portray his nationalism since they formed the places where he renewed vows never to take part in wars. Secondly, “he visited Yasukuni shrines to express relevance and gratitude to all the war dead despite the fact that these include class A war criminal” (Okuyama 106).

Arguably, from this cited reason of why Koizumi visited the shrine, it is questionable whether the shines are the best places to show ones patriotism. However, it is evident that Japanese people have a strong prescription to traditional religious beliefs as the main ways of portraying sincerity in ones commitments to the Japanese people and the nation as a whole.

The analysis of Shintoism as one of the theories of development of nationalism in Japan cannot be accomplished without considering the philosophers’ attempts to ensure the national beliefs were revived and purified.

The idea was to enhance the removal of all foreign ideas that were imported from various nations including China and India. The Shintoism restoration movement began in the 18th century with Motoori Noringa playing proactive roles. This campaign gave rise to the state Shinto with the emperor of Japan then claiming to be of Amaterasu decently.

A certain representation that tends to link people together creates the spirit of nationalism. According to Wang, the identification may include “China’s neo-neo-tribe and “Japanese shin shin jinrei” (547).

To Wang, such a representation can be used to secure a market for a particular product because it has high likelihoods of securing an immense success when a product is marketed based on its capacity to create a sense of nationalism. For instance, Wang argues that the term bobo has the impact of bringing Chinese people together by creating messages of premium value (535). What this argument means is that the spirit of nationalism can also be build by the products produced by nations.

Therefore, consumption of such products helps to depict that one is truly a patriot of a given nation. Using the Wang’s analogy, the term bobo is related to being a Chinese and belonging to a bobo class. Subsequently, when a product is sold bearing the tag that it is principally made for the bobos, it means that buying this product will not only mean fitting into the bobo class. Besides, it will also depict one as a sovereign citizen of the nation where the bobos live!

From a different dimension, nationalism may be built based on the experiences that people go through as a nation. Recollection of such experiences helps to remind one of the history encountered, which is definitive of why one is a nationalist of a given nation. This kind of nationalism is perhaps well exemplified by Japan through her Hiroshima trauma.

Painful experiences are crucial reflections of what it takes to be a nationalist since they provide links between different cultures (Caruth 3). Therefore, while Japan may be segregated based on different cultural affiliations, the Hiroshima experiences make Japanese people develop a sense of nationalism, which is critical in helping the nation to employ all strategies possible to ensure that such an experience would never reoccur.

Therefore, the Hiroshima experience is one unifying experience that ensures all Japanese are united together amid their demographic differences (Wood 191). Arguably, this is crucial since nationalism is hard to thrive in an environment that is ruled by segregations.

Conclusion

Therefore, based on the expositions made in the paper, it is enough to declare nationalism a representation of people’s identities. The identities help in building the spirit of patriotism. Cultural elements show people’s identities and political experiences especially the ones that culminated into painful experiences.

In this paper, nationalism has been explored through consideration of clothing as one of the ways of presentation of people’s cultural artifacts in the Chinese and Japanese contexts. The Hiroshima experience has also been considered as an example of painful experiences that has helped to shape the Japanese view of nationalism.

Works Cited

Caruth, Cathy. Unclaimed Experience: Trauma, Narrative and History, Baltimore: Johnhopkins University press, 1996. Print.

Finnane, Antonia. “What Should Chinese Women Wear?” Modern China 22.2(1996): 99-131. Print.

Okuyama, Michiaki. Historicizing Modern Shinto: A New Tradition of Yasukuni Shrine. Harvard: Harvard University Press, 2005. Print.

Tamir, Yael. Liberal Nationalism. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1993. Print.

Wang, Jing. “Bourgeois Bohemians in China? Neo-Tribes and the Urban Imaginary.” The China Quarterly 183.3(2005): 532-548. Print.

Wood, Nancy. Vectors of Memory: Legacies of Trauma in Postwar Europe. New Jersey, NJ: Berg Publishers, 1999. Print.

Read more

Nationalism in the Ottoman Empire Essay

September 21, 2021 by Essay Writer

Ottoman Empire

Ottoman Empire was a Turkish empire that existed between the period of 1299 to 1923 through the control of an extensive region in Southeastern Europe, West Asia and certain regions of North Africa[1]. Ottoman Empire consisted of many provinces and states, some of which later got absorbed into the empire while others operated independently.

The empire also had control over other regions which were not part of the empire (but which sought allegiance to the Sultan of the empire) such as certain islands of the Atlantic Ocean. The Ottoman Empire therefore controlled a lot of land in the Mediterranean region and acted as a neutral trading block to both the Eastern and Western world[2]. Its collapse happened under imperial monarchy, after which it was taken over by Turkey when it became a republic[3].

The Ottoman Empire rose into dominance through conquest wars such as the battle of Kosovo which paved way for the empire’s expansion into Europe[4]. The battle of Nicopolis also saw the empire expand into other regions of the European continent but later, other conquests such as the battle of Ankara, the conquest of Constantinople and the invasion of Otranto expounded the empire even further into neighboring territories[5].

However, the empire experienced a period of stagnation and reform which saw some part of the empire’s territory revert to previous regimes such as the reversion of Balkans to Austria[6]. Many factors have been cited for the collapse of the empire; among them, environmental pressures, administrative challenges, financial constraints and the likes but this study identifies the rise of nationalism as the main cause for the collapse of the empire.

Although the Ottoman Empire is historically known to be under much of Turkish influence, its existence was not primarily defined by ethnic representation, but language and religious orientation[7].

In spite of the fact that Turkish descendants constituted a greater part of the population and started the empire in the first place, it did not take long for the Turkish rulers to note that, for the empire to utilize the enormous human potential that lay within its borders, they had to assimilate the inhabitants from their native languages into the Turkish culture[8].

This was necessary because the inhabitants had diverse potential. For example, the Greek were well endowed with administrative and managerial expertise; the Armenians were endowed with mercantile and trade skills and the Balkans captives made good soldiers[9].

Initially, all these ethnic subgroups thought of themselves as Turkish and often identified with the Turkish language. During the onset of the 19th century, there was a great nationalism wave that swept across Europe and left with it traces of the movement in the Ottoman Empire as well[10].

Considering many of the inhabitants of the Ottoman Empire were vassals of certain external countries (which were captured by the Ottoman Empire), many of them started to search for their own independence. For instance, many people who hailed from small cities and towns in Italy started thinking of themselves as Italians while pondering on the concept of establishing Italy as a country, with its own unique identity and governance structure.

Italianism was therefore seen as a viable concept among its previous inhabitants, instead of the initial perception as just a geographic identity. These sentiments were also expressed by inhabitants from Germany and subsequent years saw the unification of various inhabitants from common ascension like the Italians and Germans.

This unity worked for certain people but it acted counter-progressive for certain groups such as the Austro- Hungarian descendants[11]. This huge nationalistic wave was further fanned by the fact that the rulers of the Ottoman Empire never forced any of their inhabitants to adopt the unique Turkish identity. In so doing, many people such as the Arabs and Balkans retained their own identities[12].

For example, the Arabs retained their Muslim religion and the Balkans retained their own unique faith, which was also different from their rulers. Other regions within the empire such as those inhabited by the Greeks and the Serbians still had memories of how they enjoyed their autonomy before the rise of the Ottoman Empire; further increasing the prospects of nationalism.

These factors led to the continued growth of nationalist movements and certain European powers like Russia, Germany and England encouraged the same movement because they desired the fall of the Empire[13].This movement dented the power of the empire because thereafter, the Balkan wars emerged with the aim of liberating the Balkan’s from the Ottoman rulers.

The war later took another direction because the Balkan’s turned on their neighbors because of territorial disputes. To counter this revolution, the Ottoman rulers formed a resistance movement called the IMRO which engaged the Balkans in war and at times, in very brutal violence which earned the Ottoman rulers the title of “Blood thirsty Turks” (because their wars were extremely bloody and lethal)[14].

The conquest later moved to the Ottoman capital which had prehistorically lived in peace, but after the advent of nationalism, the region was now characterized by Arabs, Greeks, Kurds and the Armenian people. This revolution worsened just before the First World War when the Ottoman Empire found itself pulled into it because different nationalities started pushing for more representation within the empire.

At this point, the Ottoman rulers planned genocide against the Armenians and this greatly tarnished their image in the eyes of the world; a fact that still remains unsolved in the present day Turkish republic. Currently, there is a huge cloud of resentment by the Armenians over the Turkish people and although the term “genocide” has been outlawed in turkey, the events that transpired during the massive killings of Turkish revolutionists remains very clear[15].

Though many observers hold divergent opinions over the occurrence of the Armenian massacre, many hold the opinion that the killings were not intentional because the Ottoman rulers were only trying to counter increased resistance within its borders because the Armenians were siding with their enemies in territorial wars[16].

The war was further worsened by poor planning and unreliable soldiers on the Turkish side but regardless of these divergent opinions, it remains very clear that injustices of epic proportions took place; considering the Armenians were initially loyal servants of the Ottoman rulers.

After the wave of nationalism took centre stage in Ottoman politics, a number of effects were felt throughout the economy, puncturing the social fabric of the empire. Compared to the massive killing of Armenians by the Ottoman authorities, a less atrocious, but of equal magnitude displacement occurred when the Greeks and Turks decided to make their countries mono-ethnic.

This event saw the massive expulsion of people from both countries, despite the fact that Greeks who were expelled from turkey probably never spoke the language or seen the place in the first place. In the same regard, the Turks who were expelled from Greece had their forefathers live in the country since pre-historical days[17].

These two groups were then forced to seek habitation elsewhere; amid strangers. During this time, the Ottoman Empire had already died and was under turkey’s leader, Ataturk, who had at the time expelled Greek army men who’d planned to take over certain regions of the Byzantine Empire[18].

During the rule of Ataturk, Turkey had already given in to the concept of nationalism but it adopted a milder form of the concept when compared to its neighbors (because the then ruler said that whoever identified himself or herself as Turkish, and spoke the Turkish language, was to be regarded as Turkish)[19].

However, today, Turkey has found itself at crossroads when dealing with people who live within its borders and don’t want to be associated with the Turkish culture or language. With increased nationalist movements in the empire, the once multifaceted millet movement under the Ottoman Empire disintegrated into autonomous entrants.

Social amenities like schools hospitals and churches were built with exclusive ownership of different nationalities, thereby moving religious groups out of the wider Ottoman leadership. The Ottoman millet system thereafter crumbled under this movement as more autonomous identification was sought, with the identification of inhabitants under religious lines; coupled with predominant elements of ethnic nationalism.

This movement could also not contain the religious differences that existed within the Ottoman Empire, especially after the Armenians expressed their wish to be totally liberated from the Ottoman rule because they felt a Muslim regime could not effectively govern their largely Christian population[20].

This prompted the Armenians to grant them more independence and therefore the set up of religious administrative units kicked off. The decline of the empire greatly dented the economy of the region considering new trade routes were no longer passing through the Ottoman territory.

Initially, the empire harbored most trade routes between Europe and Asia because it stood at a strategic point between the two continents. Since most nationalities embraced the idea of nationalism to a great extent, the once homogenous nature of the Ottoman economy was no longer there. In other words, there was a loss of expertise because initially, different nationalities rallied behind the Ottoman leadership in establishing the dominance of the Ottoman economy in the region.

Internal wrangles thereafter ensued and the economic momentum that was once witnessed by the empire could no longer be sustained. The numerous wars being fought within the empire’s territory also greatly affected the economic development of the area because more energy was being directed at internal fighting and in making assertions of territorial control, such that, little resources were put into innovation and development.

This fact also partially caused the decline of the empire because the once superior goods from the Ottoman Empire could no longer compete with European goods which were produced from innovative industrial practices during the industrial revolution. The empire’s economy was therefore severely dented and its goods were rendered ineffective and obsolete[21].

The rise of nationalistic movements also left the wider Arabian world vulnerable to European influence because in the past, certain regimes from France and Britain had considerable interest in the Arab world and the existence of the Ottoman Empire meant that such regimes had to bypass the Ottoman leadership to deal with the Arab world.

The fall of the empire was quite a relief for the European powers because their power could be felt much more strongly now that the Ottoman leadership was no longer in existence. For instance, the domination of the British greatly increased after the collapse of the Ottoman Empire[22].

From the increased nationalistic movements and the collapse of the Ottoman Empire, the level of warfare increased among the nations involved because most countries found and increased need to cement their superiority over other nations. For instance, the Baton wars were primarily necessitated by nationalistic movements[23].

However, as nationalism ravaged the Ottoman Empire, it left with it a trail of nation-states which developed their own identities along ethnic, and language lines. The nationalistic movement of the 19th century essentially brought among the first emergence of nations-states which had their own political, economic and social systems. One of the most notable outcomes of the nationalistic movements from the Ottoman Empire was the emergence of the First World War which was largely based on national superiority.

The Ottoman Empire tried to defend Germany in the conquest but idealistically, the already formed autonomous units already had different ideologies of their own and instead chose to fight alongside other countries of their own choice as well.

The level of warfare therefore increased to a great extent and nation after nation were after exerting their influence on the global map. This fact even led to the scramble of colonies across the world because nations were after building their own profiles through the acquisition of more colonies globally[24].

Politically, states that broke away from the Ottoman Empire found themselves realigned on nationalistic lines. This became the new frontier where politicians marshaled their support from because political parties that advocated for nationalistic agendas found favor among voters. This also created a status of less critiquing for the existent political systems because so long as the political system had a nationalistic agenda, everyone would be okay with it[25].

An increased sense of intolerance among regions which broke away from the Ottoman Empire was also noted after nationalism entrenched itself. People who never shared a common nationality with the majority; or those who opposed the political system which the majority of the people identified with, found themselves on the receiving end of nationalistic conflicts[26].

Such was the level of conflict noted between Greece and Turkey because they expelled each other’s nationals from their own countries. The same was also exhibited when the Turks carried out a form of ethnic cleansing exercise on Armenians who opposed their current political system.

Also, Greece which was part of the Ottoman Empire found it increasingly difficult to grant territorial powers to Macedonia for trade purposes because it thought Macedonia was going to claim a portion of its Northern territory. Such was the kind of aggressiveness that shaped international politics as a result of nationalism. Nationalism forces therefore became the new attitude among breakaway nations, even though their language or religious inclinations never changed in the first place.

The effects of nationalism after the Ottoman Empire can even be seen in the 21st century where different states still adopt a widely nationalistic attitude when relating to other nations. For example, certain countries in the Western European block have hindered companies from Poland, Hungary and Czech Republic from trading in their territories because of the threat these nations pose on their national superiority[27].

Also in the pretext of preserving national heritage, certain governments such as Romania and Slovakia inhibit certain minorities in their country such as Hungarians from starting their own schools and using their native language to teach students[28]. Bulgaria is also oppressing the minority Turkish population from expressing themselves linguistically through cultural domination[29].

However, nationalism has not only affected nations that broke away from the Ottoman empire because across the world, certain countries like the US still adopt largely nationalistic policies in their political, economic and social systems. For example, the US currently holds the opinion that for its economic prosperity to continue, and for the well being of the country, a trade war needs to be waged against Japan; oblivious of the fact that many Americans live by trading with Japan in the first place[30].

In Europe, The French government is trying to restrict the number of American films currently being shown in its media because they believe the American culture threatens its national heritage and culture[31]. Such are the intrigues that characterized the fall of the Ottoman Empire, affecting the world today.

Nationalism has been identified as the main concept which led to the collapse of the millet concept in the Ottoman Empire[32]. In detail, the understanding of nationalism in the Ottoman Empire is much different from the concept of nationalism in today’s society because it was majorly built along religious lines, thereby explaining the intrigues that led to the collapse of the empire.

In fact, the concept of nationalism in the Ottoman Empire was very complex because each group awakened to this concept differently and disintegration happened much faster. This is true because the Ottoman Empire rose on the basis of regional integration, sourced from its expansive territory. The advent of nationalism in the European continent is therefore one of the most basic reasons why the empire collapsed.

Through this event, the empire suffered economic, social and political setbacks because the level of warfare increased, the economy plunged and the social fabric of the empire tore apart. The Ottoman leadership also found it difficult to contain the revolution and frantic efforts to reestablish the empire can be witnessed through its misguided efforts to carry out ethnic cleansing on the Armenians. Some of these actions still lie as unresolved issues even today.

However, the Ottoman leadership gave in to the nationalistic uprising as different regions sought autonomy from the Empire. Such an uprising was difficult to stop considering previous Ottoman regimes let certain religious and native identities coexist within its borders.

Many people therefore found it easy to revert back to their nationalistic ideologies and since the empire was multifaceted, the movement spread fast and was uncontrollable. Whether nationalism did any good to the breakaway nations or not is debatable but it can be concluded that the nationalistic force that started in Europe significantly contributed to the collapse of the empire and defines international politics today.

Works Cited

Berkes, Niyazi. The Development of Secularism in Turkey. London: Routledge, 1998.

Breuilly, John. Nationalism and the State. Manchester: Manchester University Press ND, 1982.

Duiker, William. Contemporary World History. New York: Cengage Learning, 2009.

Ebeling, Richard. Nationalism: It’s Nature and Consequences. June. 1994. Web.

Kieser, Hans-Lukas. Turkey Beyond Nationalism: towards Post-Nationalist Identities. London: I.B.Tauris, 2006.

Macfie, A L. The End of the Ottoman Empire, 1908-1923. London: Longman, 1998.

Quataert, Donald. The Ottoman Empire, 1700-1922. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2005.

Roshwald, Aviel. Ethnic Nationalism and the fall of Empires: Central Europe, Russia, and The Middle East, 1914-1923. Routledge, 2001.

Footnotes

  1. Macfie, A L. The End of the Ottoman Empire, 1908-1923. London: Longman, 1998, p. 1.
  2. Macfie, A L. The End of the Ottoman Empire, 1908-1923. London: Longman, 1998, p. 3.
  3. Kieser, Hans-Lukas. Turkey Beyond Nationalism: towards Post-Nationalist Identities. London: I.B.Tauris, 2006, p. 2.
  4. Macfie, A L. The End of the Ottoman Empire, 1908-1923. London: Longman, 1998, p. 3.
  5. Macfie, A L. The End of the Ottoman Empire, 1908-1923. London: Longman, 1998, p 3.
  6. Roshwald, Aviel. Ethnic Nationalism and the fall of Empires: Central Europe, Russia, and The Middle East, 1914-1923. Routledge, 2001, p. 13.
  7. Roshwald, Aviel. Ethnic Nationalism and the fall of Empires: Central Europe, Russia, and The Middle East, 1914-1923. Routledge, 2001, p. 57.
  8. Roshwald, Aviel. Ethnic Nationalism and the fall of Empires: Central Europe, Russia, and The Middle East, 1914-1923. Routledge, 2001, p. 57.
  9. Duiker, William. Contemporary World History. New York: Cengage Learning, 2009, p. 16.
  10. Duiker, William. Contemporary World History. New York: Cengage Learning, 2009, p. 14.
  11. Roshwald, Aviel. Ethnic Nationalism and the fall of Empires: Central Europe, Russia, and The Middle East, 1914-1923. Routledge, 2001, p. 57.
  12. Roshwald, Aviel. Ethnic Nationalism and the fall of Empires: Central Europe, Russia, and The Middle East, 1914-1923. Routledge, 2001, p. 57.
  13. Duiker, William. Contemporary World History. New York: Cengage Learning, 2009, p. 15.
  14. Duiker, William. Contemporary World History. New York: Cengage Learning, 2009, p. 16.
  15. Roshwald, Aviel. Ethnic Nationalism and the fall of Empires: Central Europe, Russia, and The Middle East, 1914-1923. Routledge, 2001, p. 59.
  16. Roshwald, Aviel. Ethnic Nationalism and the fall of Empires: Central Europe, Russia, and The Middle East, 1914-1923. Routledge, 2001, p. 58.
  17. Quataert, Donald. The Ottoman Empire, 1700-1922. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2005, p. 67.
  18. Quataert, Donald. The Ottoman Empire, 1700-1922. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2005, p. 67.
  19. Breuilly, John. Nationalism and the State. Manchester: Manchester University Press ND, 1982, p. 118.
  20. Quataert, Donald. The Ottoman Empire, 1700-1922. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2005, p. 68.
  21. Breuilly, John. Nationalism and the State. Manchester: Manchester University Press ND, 1982, p. 118.
  22. Breuilly, John. Nationalism and the State. Manchester: Manchester University Press ND, 1982, p. 118.
  23. Berkes, Niyazi. The Development of Secularism in Turkey. London: Routledge, 1998, p. 5.
  24. Breuilly, John. Nationalism and the State. Manchester: Manchester University Press ND, 1982, p. 5.
  25. Breuilly, John. Nationalism and the State. Manchester: Manchester University Press ND, 1982, p. 5.
  26. Breuilly, John. Nationalism and the State. Manchester: Manchester University Press ND, 1982, p. 5
  27. Ebeling, Richard. Nationalism: It’s Nature and Consequences. June. 1994. p. 14.
  28. Ebeling, Richard. Nationalism: It’s Nature and Consequences. June. 1994. p. 14.
  29. Ebeling, Richard. Nationalism: It’s Nature and Consequences. June. 1994. p. 14
  30. Ebeling, Richard. Nationalism: It’s Nature and Consequences. June. 1994. p. 14
  31. Ebeling, Richard. Nationalism: It’s Nature and Consequences. June. 1994. p. 14
  32. Roshwald, Aviel. Ethnic Nationalism and the fall of Empires: Central Europe, Russia, and The Middle East, 1914-1923. Routledge, 2001, p. 1.
Read more

New Nationalism: Origins and Effects Essay

September 21, 2021 by Essay Writer

By the end of 19th century, the west embarked on a hasty shift towards industrialization. This resulted to short-term challenges in working conditions, increase in poverty levels, and displacement. The countries had difficulty matching the demands and expectations of industrialization.

Their ability to adapt could not match the quick developments in areas of technology. This resulted to upsurge in revolutionary movements that agitated against various aspects of modern capitalism. Consequently, the term “Fin de siècle” applied in reference to a prevalent cultural movement that spread across Europe. The movement concentrated on issues relating to history of man and the intrigues of civilization.

There was increasing discontent over the idea that history and civilization were indicative of change. The idea that progress was always good came under serious criticism. Critics argued that modern civilization and hasty progress would result to emergence of individuals without a connection to society and its values. They argued that civilization would change the order of things in society.

The “Fin de siècle” proponents were in favour of emotions, subjectivity, and vitality. They viewed civilization as a hurdle that required an elaborate remedy. The movement favoured community ideals over individual and subjective ideals. There was rebellion against liberalism and unprecedented rise of right-wing politics that sought to conserve tradition and fought against change. This turn of events precipitated apathy and heightened tension across most European countries.

The emergence of social Darwinism provided the motivation for more supportive discourse with regard to race. Some proponents of Darwinism viewed human history as a culmination of racial contests. They not only evaluated national success but also individual success based on social, economic, and political parameters. This was vital in ensuring that they generated accurate and acceptable deductions. Positivist scientists viewed race in terms of hereditary factors and transcendence.

They relied on precise scientific procedures as opposed to speculation. This accorded them a chance to achieve accurate and precise inferential data. Scientists proposed a possible genetic connection between individuals in different nations. They argued that such connections supersede any form of physical or social bond between individuals. The findings were remarkable to the world of science.

This interpretation heralded a new meaning regarding the concept of nationalism. This brought a new dimension to understanding of social situations and the required procedure for diffusing upheavals in society. The biological approach to nationalism changed the understanding on nation and other related social context. This resulted to the development of the scientific theory of eugenics.

The concept of racial purity emerged with claims that race precedes culture. It argued that racial synthesis led to chaos and confusion in society. Hygiene among races was an indicator of traditional understanding of public health. Scholars struggled to define the hereditary circumstances of individuals, with emphasis on grouping individuals according to their racial and ethnic roots.

They determined this by analysing various trends such as attitudes, language, dressing, and other characteristic behaviours. States acquired definition as ethnic groupings as opposed to territorial entities.

This concept of nation denoted a communal group whose members shared a common biological identity. Through such identities, members developed a clear system of values that surrounded their racial and ethnic existence. The biological identity influenced the degree of development and advancement in terms of cultural, social, political, and other aspects of a nation.

Read more

The Concept and History of Liberal Nationalism Essay

September 21, 2021 by Essay Writer

In the lawless world of the ancients the need for a great leader was never in question. In a time when tribes and small nations regularly go to war there was a need for a strong leader and there were times when members of a community, tribe or city would willingly offer themselves and their family under the authority of dictator in exchange for a life of stability and safety. In ancient times and to some extent to the present generation, people had found stability in monarchy.

In order to perpetuate kings and queens regarded themselves as children of the divine and therefore secured the right to rule. But in the modern age, people who were disgusted and fed-up with their abuse of authority decided to form nations based on the idea of liberty and equality. Although liberalism is linked to the idea of freedom there is a need to examine if liberal nationalism advances shared national interests at the deliberate expense of state power and sovereignty.

Background

It would be difficult to fully understand nationalism and the rise of liberal theory without going through the finished work of John Locke and Thomas Hobbes. John Locke believed that men were created equal in the eyes of God and should never be shackled under the power of a dictator or tyrant. Thomas Hobbes on the other hand is believed that personal freedom can be sacrificed for the sake of peace, security, and progress.

Thomas Hobbes was born a few decades before John Locke and he was born into a European continent where nations are constantly at war.

His particular experience with the English Civil War and its accompanying hardships led him to the conclusion that, “There must be some coercive power to compel men equally to the performance of their covenants, by the terror of some punishment, greater than the benefit they expect by the breach of their covenant” (Knutsen, 1997, p.12). In other words Hobbes made it clear that a powerful leaders is needed to sustain a country or a community.

Political analysts explained even further Hobbes’ point of view by explaining that, “Because virtually any government would be better than a civil war, people ought to submit themselves to an absolute political authority.

Continued stability will require that they also refrain from the sorts of actions that might undermine such a regime … Hobbes aimed to demonstrate the reciprocal relationship between political obedience and peace” (Lloyd, 2002, p.1). Hobbes believed there is nothing wrong with a centralised government having the power to hold sway over the livesof many people.

John Locke on the other hand was one of the first to outline the idea that a human being has inalienable rights such as life, liberty, health, and property (Uzgalis, 2007, p.1). Locke and Hobbes may disagree on the idea of freedom and equality but they had the same view when it comes to the idea that there is such a thing as a natural state from which all beings came forth. In this natural state man is free and has rights. A human being has the right to self-preservation and that he or she has the right to liberty and property.

Hobbes was well-schooled in the failures of civilization and so he asserted that it is only when man surrenders his rights and obey without question the rules given by a king then man could never experience the full benefits of good governance and at the same time ensure the stability of a nation. Locke on the other hand, feared that power will corrupt any ruler.

Nationalism

It has been said that “the concept of nationalism is a relatively new idea” (Haas, 1997, p.3). Hobbes and Locke may have thought about it but their “ideas were focused on kingdoms and perhaps tribal groups” (Haas, 1997, p.3).

It can be argued that it is only in the “Age of Renaissance where one can find the emergence of this particular idea, the idea that a group of people came together to form an association in order to attain a common goal” (Kohn, 2005, p.7). It has been argued that it was in modern day England wherein the idea of nationalism was first used (Haas, 1997, p.4). But others say that it was the in France when the concept of nationalism was developed and used in its present form (Kohn, 2005, p.7).

Nationalism is seen as a byproduct of ethnicity (Kohn, 2005, p.7). Hans Kohn then presented his case by saying that: “There is a natural tendency in man … to love his birthplace or the place of his childhood sojourn, its surroundings, its climate, the contours of hills and valleys, of rivers and trees (Kohn, 2005, p.7). This is nationalism as understood in its present form.

Nationalism is just the framework that allows political analyst the capability to group individuals and ethnic groups and label them conveniently. But there is a need to know how to govern this people or at least identify the principles that can be used to develop laws and statutes that will ensure peace, progress, and equality.

Just about the same time when nationalism was invented, the idea of liberalism also took off with great speed and spread far and wide in the Western world. John Locke wrote that liberals are in a “state of perfect freedom to order their actions …. as they think fit … without asking leave, or depending on the will of any other man” (Gaus, 2010, p.1).

John Stuart Mill said that “the burden of proof is supposed to be with those who are against liberty; who contend for any restriction or prohibition … the a priori assumption is in favour of freedom” (Gaus, 2010, p.1). It is clear therefore that liberty is rooted in humanism or in simpler terms the concept that man is a special being that even a King or Prime Minister has no right to look down on him, use him as an instrument to satisfy his lust and capricious living.

Liberal Nationalism

Liberalism has been extolled as the saviour of the world. In the modern world wherein ideas flowed freely and men and women were stirred up b a different type of nationalism, one that will put them on equal footing with their king, liberalism was a powerful concept that transformed traditional and conservative societies into bastions of liberalism – the people have absolute freedom within the confines of a law that view everyone equal and placed an end to tyranny. It paved the way for the creation of a government for the people and by the people.

According to philosophers who studied this phenomenon, “Each individual imagines himself absolutely free, unencumbered, and on his own – and enters society, accepting its obligations, only in order to minimize his risk … his goal is security is the assurance of his egoism” (Walzer & Miller, 2007, p.98).

This simplified the purpose and significance of living and that is the emergence of an individual separated from the community, isolated, and only thinking about his private interest and working “in accordance to his private caprice” (Walzer & Miller, 2007, p.98).

Using the definition given above one can put all of it together to have a general idea of liberal nationalism and it is based on the assumption that “liberalism is a theory abut the eminence of individual liberties and personal autonomy, nationalism is a theory about the eminence of national-cultural membership and historical continuity, and the importance of perceiving one’s present life and one’s future development as an experience shared with others” (Tamir, 1993, p.79).

Based on this overview of liberalism and nationalism one can begin to understand that the theory of liberal nationalism is going to lead the nation to a place of greater freedom and more benefits but through the expense of state power and sovereignty.

According to this political theory the only way that true liberalism can be experienced is through the reduction of the power of the state to control its members. There is always the tension between the two. A government requires a certain level of surveillance or at least a basic understanding of the movement of people within its borders.

This is the reason why some countries use a national identification system and to some extent this is the purpose of conducting a regular census to know more about the population under its governance. But liberty, equality, and prosperity can only be achieved in full without the power of the government bearing on it like sentinel ready to punish those who break the law.

The law is important but it can too excessive at times. The law is beneficial only to the degree that the political leaders wielding this power can be trusted to dispense this power with an egalitarian mindset. But history and current events is proof that this type of leadership is rare.

Thus, an application of liberal nationalism will result in an ideal situation where there is a sense of community that pervades the nation as men and women live in harmony with the knowledge that they are one. But at the same time there is less control to enforce this homogeneity. The government does not interfere with the affairs of people. There is freedom in all sectors and the masses are given the chance to explore and at the same time experience the fullness of life.

Conclusion

Liberal nationalism can be understood as some form of an ideal concept with regards to the creation of state. It is sustaining a process of nation building that extols the necessity of liberty and equality and yet at the same time having the capability to maintain a state or nation with a people united with a sense of nationalism that allows them to move forward in unity.

This is significant because it is only through unity that a group of people – especially a nation that has millions of inhabitants – can pool their resources together and leverage all that they have to achieve great things. However, the absence of control coming from a centralised government is something difficult to achieve.

References

Gaus, G. (2010, September). Liberalism. Stanford Encyclopaedia of Philosophy. Retrieved from https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/liberalism/

Haas, E. (1997). Nationalism, Liberation, and Progress. New York: Cornell University Press.

Kohn, Hans. 2005. Nationalism: A study in its origins and background. New Jersey: Transaction Publishers.

Knutsen, T. (1997). A History of International Relations Theory. New York: Manchester University Press.

Tamir, Y. (1993). Liberal Nationalism. New Jersey: Princeton University Press.

Uzgalis, W. (2007, May). John Locke. Stanford Encyclopaedia of Philosophy. Retrieved from https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/locke/

Walzer, M. & D. Miller. (2007). Thinking Politically: Essays in Political Theory. MA: Yale University Press.

Read more
Order Creative Sample Now
Choose type of discipline
Choose academic level
  • High school
  • College
  • University
  • Masters
  • PhD
Deadline

Page count
1 pages
$ 10

Price