|
International Relations Notes on IR |
Share Thread: Facebook Twitter Google+ |
|
LinkBack | Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
#1
|
||||
|
||||
How did Nationalism unify Western Europe?
2. Define the concept of Nationalism. It has contributed to the further division of state in the world but on the contrary leading to the unification of Western Europe. Give your observation.
This was a question in the IR paper of 1999. Any help from the members regarding "How did it unify Western Europe" would be appreciated. |
#2
|
||||
|
||||
nationalism
Nationalism is a political ideology that involves a strong identification of a group of individuals with a political entity defined in national terms, i.e. a nation. It is usually the belief that a nation has a right to statehood. In the 'modernist' image of the nation, it is nationalism that creates national identity.
In Europe, before the development of nationalism, people were generally loyal to a city or to a particular leader rather than to their nation. Encyclopaedia Britannica identifies the movement's genesis with the late-18th century American Revolution and French Revolution; other historians point specifically to the ultra-nationalist party in France during the French Revolution Whereas nationalism does not necessarily imply a belief in the superiority of one ethnicity over others, some nationalists support ethnocentric protectionism or ethnocentric supremacy. Studies have yielded evidence that such behaviour may be derived from innate preferences in humans from infancy. Nationalism is inherently divisive because it highlights perceived differences between people, emphasizing an individual's identification with their own nation. The idea is also potentially oppressive because it submerges individual identity within a national whole, and gives elites or political leaders potential opportunities to manipulate or control the masses.In the Western world, the most comprehensive current ideological alternative to nationalism is cosmopolitanism. Ethical cosmopolitanism rejects one of the basic ethical principles of nationalism: that humans owe more duties to a fellow member of the nation, than to a non-member. It rejects such important nationalist values as national identity and national loyalty. However, there is also a political cosmopolitanism, which has a geopolitical program to match that of nationalism: it seeks some form of world state, with a world government. Very few people openly and explicitly support the establishment of a global state, but political cosmopolitanism has influenced the development of international criminal law, and the erosion of the status of national sovereignty. In turn, nationalists are deeply suspicious of cosmopolitan attitudes, which they equate with eradication of diverse national cultures.
__________________
Mere fana honay mei meri fana ka fana hona ha Ar meine apni fanaa mei ae khuda tujhy payaa...! |
The Following User Says Thank You to mariashamshad For This Useful Post: | ||
Tabraizmarri (Saturday, June 04, 2011) |
#3
|
||||
|
||||
Maria thanks a lot for posting a reply in response to my query, however, the statement in the question is "It (Nationalism) has contributed to the further division of state in the world but on the contrary leading to the unification of Western Europe".
In my view, the foundation of a nation-state is constituent upon three pillars; Sovereignty, territorial integrity, and equality of states. Sovereignty implies that a Government possesses virtually unlimited authority with respect to a state's internal affairs and foreign policy, however as seen during 19th and early 20th century, Nationalism changed the world map. Ottoman Empire changed shape, (Czars) Russian Empire broke down into Lithuania, Latvia, Estonia, Romania, Georgia, Armenia etc.. Germany on the other hand transformed from an oppressed state into an aggressor following Hitler's rise into power, so Nationalism did change the Westphalian State system, as the authority of the Government was challenged. In recent times, we have heard of terminologies such as "Black Nationalism" used frequently by Malcom X, or Greater Balochistan used by BLA, or even Tamils in SriLanka demanding a separate state for Tamil people, thus it would be conclusive to say that Nationalism has resulted in the division of the world to a certain extent. About the point of Western Europe unification, in my opinion "British Nationalism" can fit well within to the dimensions of this question because I can recall this as the only instance since Napoleon Bonaparte, where Nationalism has helped in bonding four countries; England, Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland. |
#4
|
||||
|
||||
Nationalism has indeed promoted unification in Europe but division in the rest of the world. I won't define nationalism because that has already been cut/pasted above but I'll answer the rest of the question.
Most 3rd World countries were patched up by their colonial overlords. For example, the Hutu and Tutsi people in Africa have been chopped up and divided into five different states, in some the former comprise the majority and in others, the latter. Similarly, the Kurds have been divided into 4 different states, the Baloch into three, Pashtuns into two, etc, etc. These are all the doings of indifferent colonial masters. In Europe, different nationalities (especially the Germans, Italians and Poles) were divided before the advent of nationalism (18th century). Nationalism brought together fragmented duchies into unified states such as Germany, Italy, Poland, etc. The nationalities of Europe took their destinies into their own hand. So in Europe, nationalism stitched together divided nationalities, however, in the Third World, since the boundaries of the states were decided by colonial masters and not the native inhabitants, nationalities have been split up into different states and many of them want unified states of their own. In the end, you can write a small passage about the two-nation theory and how all Muslims are one nation and what not. It'll please the examiner and earn you some valuable marks.
__________________
He conquers who endures. |
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Ahmed_2007_Cool For This Useful Post: | ||
candidguy (Monday, June 06, 2011), Tabraizmarri (Saturday, June 04, 2011) |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
The Roots of Muslim Rage, By: Bernard Lewis | khuhro | News & Articles | 0 | Sunday, February 20, 2011 07:21 PM |
Samuel P. Huntington's Clash of Civilizations | khuhro | News & Articles | 0 | Sunday, February 20, 2011 07:13 PM |
The Globalization of World Politics: Revision guide 3eBaylis & Smith: | hellowahab | International Relations | 0 | Wednesday, October 17, 2007 03:13 PM |
World War II | Naseer Ahmed Chandio | European History | 0 | Tuesday, December 12, 2006 10:15 AM |
The Clash of Civilizations? | zohaib | Essays | 0 | Sunday, June 19, 2005 01:07 PM |