Jamia Miliia Islamia

(A Central University)

Name-Mohd.Aqib
Faculty- LAW
(BA.LLB) Semester-1
Subject-Political Science
Project Name-Nation and Nationalism

Outline

1. Introduction
2. Political Dimension of Nation
3. Political Presentation of Nationalism
4. Nationalism in India
 Nation and Nationalism

Introduction
The concept of “nation” is historically older than nationalism as a political
movement. The English word nation comes from the Latin word NASCI,
which literally means “to be born.” The word has gradually taken the meaning
of large group of people with a common ancestry. The idea of nation takes
shape in conjunction with cultural, political, and psychological factors.
Language, religion, history, literature, folkloric themes (epics, myths, legends),
and customs are the elements creating bonds among a group of people that
transform a nation. Indeed, there is no consensus among scholars and
researchers on the subjective and objective factors for the definition of nation.
Anthony Smith (2001) distinguishes the objective factors of language, religion,
customs, territory, and institutions from the subjective category of attitudes,
perceptions, and sentiments. Renan (1882) identified the nation as a form of
morality and solidarity that was supported by historical consciousness. On the
other hand,ax Weber agrees that the nation is “obviously an ambiguous term”
(quoted in. But his way of understanding takes us to the point at which his
nation concept becomes a prestige community unified around a myth of
common descent. Weber also understands the nation as a political project that
“tends to produce a state of its own” . On the other hand, Stalin expounded on
the nation as a combination of subjective and objective elements. According to
Stalin, “A nation is a historically constituted, stable community of people,
formed on the basis of a common language, territory, economic life, and
psychological make-up manifested in a common culture” (quoted in Franklin,
1973,). From a different perspective, Greenfeld (1992) states that “social,
political, and cultural in the narrow sense, or ethnic qualities, acquire a great
significance in the formation of every specific nationalism” .

The idea of a nation as a cultural entity dates back to 18th-century German

political thinkers. Johann Gottfried von Herder, a critic, poet, and philosopher,
was the first author to mention that each nation had a cultural distinctiveness .
He emphasized the importance of language and asserted that certain ideas of an
individual in one language could not be understood in another language. He
demonstrated how epics, myths, legends, and folk songs build a spirit that can
be named volksgeist. Herder preferred to refer to it as the “spirit of nations”
(Geist des volkes). Herder collected folk songs, which he published in his work
Voices of the People in Their Songs to underline the value of national culture,
collective memories, and traditions for a nation (Herder, 1818). The definition
of the German romantic writers was criticized with the claim that cultural
commonalities were not as powerful as in agricultural societies. On the
contrary, modern researchers underlined the role of the industrial revolution
and modernization in the spread of nationalism. Ernest Gellner (1983), a
modern philosopher, defined “nationalism as primarily a political principle that
holds that the political and the national unit should be congruent” . He
interpreted the new cultural cohesion as a product of the industrial revolution
promulgated by education and the division of labor in industry. He
conceptualized the culture of the industrial age as high culture transmitted
through education (Gellner, 1983).

German historian Karl Renner (Reifowitz, 2009) added another level to the
discussion by demonstrating how historical destiny transformed “passive
people” (passiver Volkheit) into a group that had become conscious about
itself. Another German historian, Friedrich Meinecke (1919), clarified the
modern state-and-culture relation by identifying Kulturnation as a “largely
passive cultural community” and the Staatsnation as an “active self-
determining political nation” . He identified the nation as cultural or ethnic
affiliation versus the nation as political state. Meinecke referred to the
Germans, the Russians, the Irish, the Greeks, and the English as examples of
kultur nation. From this perspective, since culture cannot be learned, it is not
possible to become German by learning the language and adopting the lifestyle
and values. You have to be a native German to perceive the culture. This
distinction also implies two enduring ways of understanding the rise of the
nation-state.

Nationalism is a modern ideology that tries to explain the individual’s

devotion to the nation state by neglecting other interests. It has taken many
different shapes in various geographies, cultures, histories, and political
systems. Even in a particular location, nationalism has transformed from one
form to another throughout history. The core of nationalism is nation. What
constitutes a nation is a question scholars are still trying to clarify by using
approaches developed throughout the ages. Not only political science but also
other branches of the humanities are trying to understand the concepts of nation
and nationalism. The current technological innovations and rapid globalization
have added new dimensions to nationalism and its movements. Each day brings
a new peculiarity of nationalism.

The various definitions recall the story in which a group of blind men touch an
elephant to learn what it is like. Each one touches a different part, but only one
part, such as the side or the tusk. They then compare notes on what they felt
and learn they are in complete disagreement. All attempts to define nationalism
are similar: They come from the perspective of the scholars’ disciplines, and
like the blind men, each discipline touches only one aspect of nationalism. As a
result, a remarkable amount of research has been published regarding
nationalism, but theoretical progress has been limited.

The first appearance of European nationalism has been a topic of discussion. In

1648, at the end of the Thirty Years’War, the European powers signed the
Treaty of Westphalia in Munster and Osnabruck, ending interference in each
other’s domestic politics. The principle rule—cuius regio, eius religio (whose
realm, his religion)— of the treaty confirmed that the ruler’s faith became the
official religion of his state. The states formed on this principle were accepted
as preliminary examples of the nation-state in the political science literature
(Schulze, 1998). Unlike other researchers who have taken the French
revolution as a first example, Greenfeld (1992) argues that “the original
modern idea of the nation emerged in sixteenth century England, which was the
first nation in the world (and the only one with the possible exception of
Holland, for about two hundred years)” .

II. Political Dimension of Nations

The political allegiance, citizenship, and homogeneous population that form the
nation are products of the modern age. A nation is a group of people bonded to
each other by citizenship under the authority of a political construction that
ignores cultural, ethnic, and other loyalties. In this sense, Andrew Heywood
(2000) basically understood the nation as a psycho political construction. But it
also has a historical progress dating back to the French revolution, when the
transition from monarchic structures, in which the individuals were subjects of
the crown, to the constitutional state, which promoted participatory rule, took
place. Jean-Jacques Rousseau conceptualized the participation of the people
with the term general will. In Social Contract, Rousseau wrote, “Each of us
puts his person and all his power in common under the supreme direction of the
general will, and, in our corporate capacity, we receive each member as an
indivisible part of the whole” 1. In these lines, he explains general will not only
as one of the principles of the nation but also as a condition for the formation of
the nation-state. Nationalism emerged from the national sentiment created
within these nation-states. Mainstream researchers understood nationalism as
an output of nation-states. Meinecke created the term state nation to describe an
entity differing from the nation-state. The concept of state-nation was based on
Rousseau’s idea of general will and the nations formed by states. According to
Meinecke, the nation-state gradually evolved from an individual culture. As a
result, he concluded that states were formed from nations.

Eric Hobsbawm (Hobsbawm & Ranger, 1983) opposed the idea that nations
were basically ethnic groups formed throughout history. He asserted that
nations were superficially formed by nationalism, and he conceptualized the
condition as an “invented tradition.” He presented his example thusly:

1
Jean-Jacques Rousseau, The Social Contract, 77,Create Space Independent Publishing Platform,2014
Israeli and Palestinian nationalism or nations must be novel, whatever the
historic continuities of Jews or Middle Eastern Muslims, because the very
concept of territorial states, of the current standard type in their region, was
barely thought of a century ago, and hardly became a serious prospect before
the end of World War I.

Benedict Anderson’s research also supports Hobsbawm with his use of the
term imagined communities. Anderson stated that “a nation is an imagined
political community that is imagined as both inherently limited and sovereign.”
He also clarified his approach thusly: “A nation is imagined because the
members of even the smallest nation will never know most of their fellow-
members, meet them, or even hear of them, yet in the minds of each lives the
image of their communion” . He claimed that education, political
communication, and the mass media played a crucial role in building this
imaginary sense. These approaches have also been supported by Marxism,
which believes that the concepts of nation and nationalism belong to the
bourgeoisie. These concepts were constructed as instruments to exploit (rule)
other classes through the creation of loyalty based on the sense of nation, which
was more powerful than the binding power of the working classes.

Nations somehow evolved into politics and have thereafter been processed
under the rules of politics. As in Meinecke’s definition of political nations, the
significance of citizenship is more intensive than that of ethnicity. Cultural
heterogeneity is one of the common indicators of these countries. The United
States and the United Kingdom are given as the examples of this type of
political nation. In this context, Meinecke also differentiates the terms state
nation and nation state. The nation-state refers to the state that was built on the
crystallization of an individual culture. However, the state-nation is based on
Rousseau’s “general will” and is a nation constructed by the state. The case of
the United States fits the state-nation concept. It is hard to build a national
identity that depends on the commonality of a shared cultural and historical
past because of the multiethnic and multicultural characteristics of the United
States. U.S. nationhood formed around the voluntary acceptance of a set of
common values, principles, and goals by all citizens. It is possible to use the
melting-pot analogy for these types of states. Since state-nations are not
composed of one individual culture, they have the challenge of creating an
organic unity.

Nationalism and the political nation concepts have generally been understood
in the European context. As a result, the nation-state and national identity have
peculiar problems in the third world, where two major streams have been
followed. First, national identities were built up during their struggles for
freedom in national independence wars against colonial powers. These
identities were strongly shaped under the anticolonial characteristics of that
period. Second, national identity was shaped by territorial boundaries. These
borders were usually inherited from the colonial past. Contemporary maps of
the Middle East and Africa provide a clear example of these divisions. These
“nations” have a wide range of ethnicities, but few commonalities except their
shared colonial past. Therefore, to achieve statehood, “nationhood” had to be
built on existing conditions, which rewrite the history, fabricate a national
language, and produce a national education system. Nevertheless, the
differences in ethnic and political identities generate tensions within the nation
and, from time to time, escalate into conflict. The transformation from colonial
rule and empires to nation-states affected the nationalism movements of the
20th century.

III. The Political Presentation of Nationalism

The application of theories on the ground generates varieties of
nationalism in political life. Nationalism seems to have been one of the
most progressive and driving forces of political life in the 20th century.
However, the characteristics of nationalism are generally shaped in the
context of and according to the political ideas attached to it. Nationalism
could be progressive, liberating, reactionary, authoritarian, conservative,
democratic, oppressive, left wing, or right wing. In a colony, it emerges as
anticolonial nationalism and promotes the liberation of the people. The
major political presentations of nationalism could be grouped as liberal
nationalism, conservative nationalism, expansionist nationalism, and
anticolonial nationalism.

Liberal nationalism, also known as civic or civil nationalism, is different from

the other types of political presentations of nationalism in that liberal
nationalism is characteristically nonxenophobic. The main assumption of
liberal nationalism is that human beings naturally divide into nations that
possess a separate and unique identity. Liberal nationalism supports every
nation’s right to self-determination and freedom. The builder of Italian
unification, Giuseppe Mazzini, defined the harmony of nationhood in his work
as “the idea of a sisterhood of nations” . Liberal nationalism is opposed to
oppressive and autocratic multinational empires. . The criticism of liberal
nationalism mainly considers the approach romantic and unsophisticated
because it concentrates only on the progressive side of nationalism while
neglecting tribalism, xenophobia, and racism. Other major critics have focused
on the political practices of nation-states without considering how these
coincide with the linguistic, religious, and ethnic areas within a state’s borders.
Conservative nationalism reached its zenith after World War I with the
establishment of national states, although it could be dated back to Bismarck’s
German nation and Disraeli’s one nation concept. Conservative nationalism
brings social cohesion and public solidarity derived from patriotism into focus
and is not interested in the national self-determination of liberal nationalism.
After the establishment of a nation-state, the political elite of that state try to
build a nation through the creation of a consistent history and language.

One of the major political manifestations of nationalism is expansionist

nationalism. This type has an aggressive character coupled with intentions to
extend its territory. Governments that pursue expansionist policies explain their
interest in the territories either with historical causes or with claims that the
existing territory the nation inhabits is too small or is not able to physically or
economically support the nation’s population. Expansionist nationalism
became visible before World War II with the examples of Germany and Japan.
Expansionist nationalism appears with right wing ideologies and emphasizes
the importance of the nation over the individual. Another nation or race is
defined as a threat or enemy, and this fear is used in building a national identity
sustained by a type of negative integration. The sense of the “other” is the main
force and motivation to keep “us” together. The image of the other is formed
by prejudgments and negative feelings.The last step of expansionist
nationalism is to define a natural space for the nation, as in the example of Nazi
Germany’s demand for lebensraum (living space).

Anticolonial nationalism emerged at the end of the struggle against colonial

powers. Early appearances of anticolonial nationalism imitated European forms
of nationalism but displayed peculiar characteristics. Each instance of
anticolonial nationalism was unique and carried a spatial characteristic.
Anticolonial nationalism built on the idea of nationhood by the degree of the
exploitation and inequality to which the nations that had a colonial past were
exposed. Socialism and particularly Marxism– Leninism were embraced in
anticolonial nationalism.

To sum up, in the 21st century, the subjective and objective factors of
nationalism are rapidly changing with globalization and technological
innovations. Indeed, with its Internet communication capabilities and mass
media, the digital age has made the world smaller. Now even the untouched
spaces on earth have been connected by global information, which squeezes the
local culture in order to accommodate itself. Indigenous cultures are forming
counter reactionary identities, and micro-scale nationalisms are emerging. In
the long run, the number of small nationalities will probably increase. From the
regional perspective, these local nationalisms also unify and create more
powerful regional nationalist movements, as well. Because borders are
changing and new identities are emerging, social scientists of this century are
witnessing how the process of nation building commences and continues in
various parts of the world. Local languages are more apparent and supported by
international organizations. Oral literatures have been published as books, and
rituals of culture are turning into traditions. On the other hand, the concept of
the nation is changing, especially in the sense of ethnicity. Thanks to the
advances in DNA research, several projects now aim to find the genetic sources
of various ethnic groups. Today, it is growing easier to follow the traces of a
nation’s birth and development, a trend that might modify the meaning of
nation and nationalism. Social, technological, and economic challenges are
jeopardizing the nation-state concept. It is expected that the term will deviate
slightly from its original meaning. Gellner (1992) has described the world we
are living in as follows:

“a world in which one style of knowledge, though born of one culture, is being
adapted by all of them, with enormous speed and eagerness, and is disrupting
many of them, and is totally transforming the milieu in which men [sic] live.”

Nationalism in India

Origin of nationalism in India:

The growth of nationalism in India can be traced back to the period of ancient
India. It can be traced through different stages. They include:
a. Nationalism under ancient India
b. Nationalism in the medieval period.
c. Nationalism in the pre-independence period.
d. Nationalism in the post independent period.

Nationalism in the ancient period:

The origin of nationalism can be traced back to ancient India. People of ancient
India had a sense of loyalty towards their motherland. The Rig-Veda hymns
refer to India as “Bharata Varsha or Bharata Khanda.”

The feeling of nationalism was strengthened in the age of Mauryas and Guptas.
During the age of Mauryas monarchy was the form of government in Vogue.
The supreme power loyalty towards the king itself was considered as
nationalism. Mauryan administration was based on the guidelines of
Arthashastra.
The Maurayan Empire was divided into a number of provinces headed by
governors. Such governors had to report to the king.
The contribution of Mauryans to “nationalism” is considered as significant
since they followed “imperial policy and brought a major part of north India
under their control.
The age of Guptas and nationalism:
The amalgamation of the Gupta and the Lichhaivi dynasties led to the
foundation of imperial power of Guptas.

Samudra Gupta was the most powerful king among the Guptas and extended
his empire by his remarkable expeditions. Chandra Gupta Vikramaditya
succeeded Samudra Gupta.
During the reign of Guptas, the Gupta Empire crossed the rivers of Punjab and
Indus and carried arms beyond the Hindukush. The Gupta Empire was known
for its supremacy in the north-western frontier.
In southern India there were powerful kingdoms like Satavahanas, Chalukyas,
Pallavas and Cholas.
The idea of nationalism did not receive concrete shape during ancient India;
nationalism was almost equated with Regionalism. Since there were a number
of small provinces. Loyalty towards a province itself was considered as
nationalism. In ancient India regionalism overshadowed the concept of
nationalism.

Medieval India and Nationalism:

Medieval India was mainly dominated by the Muslim Rule. Among the Muslim
rulers Mughal rulers made some contribution to the idea of nationalism. Akbar
was the most powerful king among the Mughal kings. A larger part of north
India was brought under the control of the Mughals. The form of government
was autocratic monarchy. The king was the highest temporal authority. He was
the source of the entire administrative law.
During the Mughal rule the imperial authority of the king was respected and
loyalty towards the king was treated as nationalism. Hostility towards the
emperor was punished.
During Medieval India the idea of nationalism gained momentum. There was a
significant increase in the Muslim population. The Muslims occupied
significant positions in the government and they were loyal to the king.
Nationalism during the pre-independence period:
During the British rule the idea of nationalism was further strengthened. The
British came to India for the purpose of trading and occupied the whole of
India. The freedom struggle which took place in India marked concrete idea of
nationalism.
The following are certain important phases of freedom struggle which led to
the growth of nationalism in India:

1. Sepoy Mutiny:
It took place in the year 1857. It is also described as the Great revolt of 1857 or
the First War of independence. It was not merely a military mutiny against the
British rule but it assumed the character of a popular rebellion.
The interesting feature of this mutiny was that the sepoys who revolted against
the British proselytism were supported by peasants, traders and other classes of
people. The Mughal emperor Bahadur Shah was declared as the emperor of
India.
Formation of Indian National Congress:
With the spread of English education an ‘intelligentsia’ class developed in the
society. Concerted action against foreign rule became a common feature of
Indian politics. A body of educated people organized themselves under the
guidance of A.O. Hume and started an organization known as Indian national
congress in 1885. It held its first meeting in Bombay. Year after year the Indian
National Congress gained strength and played a crucial role in creating
awareness among people.

2. Civil Disobedience Movement:

The Nagpur session of the Indian national Congress declared attainment of
Swaraj by peaceful and legitimate means. Under the leadership of Mahatma
Gandhi the Congress organization turned into a nationwide mass organisation.
In the year 1921 Gandhiji launched the civil disobedience movement which
lasted for fourteen months.
He called upon the on people to give up titles and honours given by the
government. People boycotted the law courts and educational institutions. They
withdrew from government services and refused to pay tax.
Thousands of people sacrificed their wealth, position and comfort. The
willingness of people to make any sacrifice for the country’s cause
strengthened nationalism. It received the attention of the whole world.
3. Dandi Satyagaha:
It was launched under the leadership of Mahatma Gandhi. Under this
movement Gandhiji prepared salt with a set of followers. It was a daring
attempt to oppose the British administration which imposed tax on salt.

4. Quit India Movement:

It was launched in the year 1942. The whole of India joined the freedom
struggle under the leadership of Mahatma Gandhi. The entire country adopted
the slogan do or die, now or never. They demanded the British to quit India
immediately. It was a great movement which brought the whole nation
together.
Apart from the above stated instances of freedom struggle, national leaders also
contributed to the growth of nationalism.

The following are the important thoughts of the leaders:

-Subhash Chandra Bose:
He was an extremist. He organized an army at the national level known as
Indian National Army”.
-B.G. Tilak:
He was an extremist. He gave a call to his countrymen to agitate and organise.
He was popularly known as Lokmanya Tilak.
-Swami Vivekananda:
He created an awareness among the countrymen by giving a call to them “arise,
awake and stop not till the goal is reached.”

Nationalism in Modern India:

In the post-independence period Nationalism has assumed a concrete shape.
Various factors have contributed to the strengthening of nationalism which are
as follows:

1. Constitution of India:
The Constitution of India is considered as a supreme law of the land. The
preamble to the Constitution clearly declares India as a sovereign, socialist
republic nation.

2. National anthem:
Our National Anthem has played a key role in promoting nationalism. Our
National Anthem “Jana -gana-mana” was written by Rabindranath Tagore. It is
adopted throughout India. Every citizen of India has to respect national
Anthem. It is sung by all regardless of the caste, creed or community.
3. Patriotic Songs:
Some popular patriotic songs like Vande Mataram written by Bankim Chandra
Chatterjee and Sare Jaha Se Accha written by Mohammed Iqbal are sung all
over India, which signifies reverence towards the motherland.
4. National Emblem:
Tricoloured Indian flag is considered as an important national emblem. The
Tricolour signifies different aspects. Green stands for prosperity, white stands
for peace and saffron stands for sacrifice. A wheel is found in the midst of
tricolor which indicates costant progress. It is the fundamental duty of every
citizen to respect the National flag. Showing any disrespect to the National flag
by tearing burning or mutilating it in any other form is considered as an
offence.
5. National Festivals:
Certain national festivals are celebrated throughout the country. Such festivals
are observed as national holidays. The national festivals of India include the
following:
August 15, Independence day,
January 26, Republic day
October 2, Gandhi Jayanti

Though the above stated factors have strengthened nationalism, there are
certain inhibitions to nationalism. Such inhibitions are posing a serious threat
to the idea of nationalism which may be discussed as follows:

1. Separate status to Jammu and Kashmir:

Article 370 of the Constitution has granted a separate legal status to Jammu and
Kashmir. Many enactments are not made applicable to Jammu and Kashmir.
Though Indian government has declared that Jammu and Kashmir is the
integral part of India, terrorism and militant activities have become burning
issues which are posing a threat to nationalism.
2. Parochialism:
Division of states on linguistic basis has created an extreme sense of
regionalism. Parochialism has resulted in narrow thinking which has sidelined
nationalism. Inter-state water disputes and such other problems are coming in
the way of nationalism.
3. Multiplicity of Political Parties:
In India there are a number of political parties with different ideologies.
Political leaders are self-centred and opposition parties tend to oppose even the
policies made by the ruling party in the interest of nation.
4. Migration to Foreign Countries:
There are various factors which are forcing the youngsters to migrate to foreign
countries. Such factors include lack of opportunities, Red tapism, Deep rooted
corruption etc., People who have migrated to foreign countries quite often lose
their bond and identity with the motherland.
5. Apathy among masses:
People are often reluctant to express affinity and reverence towards the
motherland. The national festivals of India is gradually losing their significance
and they are more often enjoyed as holidays.
Inspite of these inhibitions India has survived as a nation because of a strong
sense of patriotism.
But unless these inhibitions are overcome a strong sense of nationalism cannot
survive.