Hakim Bouhedja
Nationalism is inherently expansionist and destructive. Discuss.
Nationalism is a political doctrine based on the principle that the boundaries between nation and that state should agree. It emerged as a historical movement in the nineteenth century rooted in the ambition of different peoples for self-determination. On the one hand it might be argued that nationalism is inherently expansionist and destructive because nationalism states that people should be divided into different nations, the citizens of each nation are joint together by a universal culture such as language, religion, and history and traditions and patriotism. Such divisions and loyalties can result in conflict, xenophobia and intolerance of diversity which might result in war.
Nationalism can be considered both expansionist and destructive for another reason; that is, it sometimes led to nation building as with Italy and Germany but also resulted in weakening existing political states such as those of Austria-Hungary and the Ottoman Empire. By the mid-nineteenth century a spirit of nationalism was obvious in before disjointed areas of Europe. A key example of this is the unification of Germany and Italy. Another result of nationalism was divisiveness within existing empires. Nationalism made history particularly in the 19th century, 'the golden age’ of nationalism, bringing about some of the greatest events. Belgium secured its independence, while in South and Central America, the colonies of Portugal and Spain declared their independence under the leadership of Simon Bolivar and Jose Martin. But the strongest sentiments of nationalism were roused by Western governments in the European colonies of the Ottoman Empire, tempting them into claiming independence. However, these events were trivial as compared to the unprecedented expansion of imperialism in the Third World, and the political clashes and conflicts of Western governments. Therefore, in my opinion, history has shown that nationalism has been far more expansionist and destructive than liberating and constructive.
Nationalism was not always expansionist and destructive however. Jean-Jacques Rousseau was one of the greatest original advocates of Nationalism. He emphasised the unity, solidarity and the group spirit of the masses and insisted that one should have the highest attachment to one's home and country where one has been brought up. He believed the nation-state to be the core and centre of a person's and a group's love and loyalty. The main example of nationalism was put down by the French Revolution, where it was first put to practice. With the progressive influence of the French Revolution in the West, the concept of nationalism rapidly gained popularity leavening behind the notions of freedom and democracy.
Most nation-states, theoretically speaking, have an ultimate goal and they exist in order to achieve it. It has been argued that their goal is to form and maintain one nation in one country; to bring all the members of a single national or ethnic group in a unified political structure. All other citizens are members of minority groups, and they tend to be seen, and see themselves as outsiders.
It is difficult to define Nationalism as either inherently destructive or expansionist. It depends on the type of Nationalism and the circumstances in which is arises and how people use or abuse it as an ideology. Heywood defines four main breeds of Nationalism; Liberal Nationalism, Conservative Nationalism, Expansionist Nationalism, Anti and post colonial Nationalism. One of the types of nationalism which is more likely to be inherently destructive and expansionist is Expansionist Nationalism, as its name suggests, is essentially destructive and expansionist. It advocates a form of national chauvinism where patriotism and national pride reaches a higher level. The nation believes that imperialism is both necessary and desirable because it spreads the benefits of their own civilisation on the lesser civilised countries. Expansionist Nationalism is a radical form of nationalism that incorporates autonomous, patriotic sentiments with a belief in expansionism. Expansionist nationalism is seen by many people as the only type of nationalism because it causes so much disaster and trauma in the mid 20th century. It emerged until the 19th century where it became associated with the far right e.g. fascists, Nazism type of nationalism. This type of nationalism is known as the hyper and ultra type of nationalism. This type of nationalism is also an intense militant and emotional ever historical type of nationalism. It rejects the liberal belief of equal nation instead xenophobic with hatred and fear of foreigners. To begin with, this type of nationalism believes that nations are locked to an eternal Darwinist struggle in which the fittest nations will survive the ultimate form of struggle in war. A key example of this is Hitler expressing this idea by the expression of ‘Hammer and anvil nations’ where Germany is the hammer and Poland and the British Empire is the anvil. This means that some nations were to be ruled and others were destined to be ruled and salved. Expansionist nationalist argue that liberal empires are temporary for those who can’t govern themselves. The fascist’s empire is forever, unless the interior can beat you. This sort of nationalism is linked to the doctrines of racial superiority even when they don’t have a theory of racial superiority; they have implications of racial superiority. In addition, Expansionist nationalists tend to see the people of their nation as the chosen people with a unique destiny and their people embodying all virtues. This sort of nationalism tends to be obsessed with pollution, contamination and decay such as the ban on interracial marriage and anti-emigration and external conduct of a nation. Expansionist nationalism is highly irrational. Nation identity is seen as unemotional condition which is in the blood. An example of this is the Nazi slogan ‘blood and soul’. However, the fascist idea that throwing yourself into a nation solves the problem of alienation which can be argued as reactionary. On the other side, this sort of nationalism is as reactionary. It looks back to the past glories e.g. Mussolini and the Roman Empire. It’s a fascist idea that nations are going to be reform after a period of weakness corruption which is know as polygenesis as Rigger Grills argued. There is a progressive type of nationalism within expansionist nationalism which looks for future conquest, looking for the past for guidance ratter than literally getting beck to the past. Within expansionist nationalism, some state nations also tried to expand their size by annexing foreign territories, for example the German seizure of Austria in 1938. However, much more often, ambitious states, like France, Britain, America, Russia and Japan conquered heterogeneous peoples and created empires in which, not surprisingly, they failed to transform them into nationals of the imperial power. Prior to their annexation the peoples involved were not divided ethno nations, as in the German/Austrian case, but separate socio-cultural communities who sometimes became assimilated to the language, life-style and culture of the dominant community and its elites, although in most cases of imperial conquest, they resisted integration and, instead, developed their separate ethnic national identities. I believe that modern expansionist and destructive imperialism is a logical consequence of the rise of nationalism and that the liberation of conquered peoples was its unavoidable consequence. In some regions, Europeans exerted complete political authority, in other areas, spheres of influence were established, and leaving the existing governments as puppets, occasionally only economic influence was exerted. Imperialism in Africa created colonies designed to serve the needs of the colonial powers. Colonial boundaries often exacerbated long-standing ethnic rivalries. The consequences of expansionist nationalism were destructive and also predictable. Competition between the expanding modern empires, rooted in expansionist nationalism, led to inter-state wars, starting overseas in the peripheral territories where these states sought to expand their rule, and it ended, during the 20th century, in gigantic inter-state wars at the centre. World Wars I and II brought the defeat of Germany and Italy in comparison with France, England, America and Russia, but all of Europe suffered from war devastation. In this period, the true off-springs of nationalism who elevated this school to its highest position and gave it its severest form were Mussolini in Italy, Hitler in Germany, Peron in Argentina, Franco in Spain and Salazar in Portugal.
