While applying reason to the control of the material world had evident advantages, its effects on human affairs were mixed. It is true that using reason could make conventional social and political systems better. However, the pursuit of rationalist theories, policies, and practices led to the emergence of new conflicts and divisions within and between pre-existing societies. For thinkers who considered themselves to be rational, the observation that some communities suffered worse than others and that some embraced enlightenment while others rejected it implied that humanity was divided into races with uneven potential. Social Darwinists believe that races are to humans what species are to other animals.
The ancient divisions were given new names by rationalists. By dividing races into nations, they reinforced existing divisions. The success of the European peoples, who were unified domestically, set themselves apart from their neighbors through language and history and consequently believed that they were different nations, leading to the idea nations were the natural unit of political organization. Although one can trace the progression of ideas from the rationally posited universal human rights to the nationalism ideology and the ensuing conviction that it was best for state and nation to coexist, it is still true that nationalism and the brotherhood of man were not logically compatible, even in theory. The ideology of nationalism, which emerged from the French Revolution, divided the existing states and communities.
Liberty, equality, and fraternity are not logically incompatible with the existence of the global state. A state based on collective humanity rather than on divided humanity can foster a more egalitarian society. Nationalism disrupts the general human affiliations of minor groups affiliation. It gave old community, religious, sectarian, and tribal divides a fresh animus and gave them a justification. Stereotypes based on race, place, ethnicity, and country have long existed in human discourse. Rationalism did not reduce the use of racial or national stereotypes, but it explained them in new ways.
Nationalism is a creation of the modern world. It has to do with the reality that the contemporary capitalist state needed a socially unifying force and that it needed the populace’s active support to include the working class in the state system. This need was met by the development of patriotism. A centralized state in charge of resources and power was what modernity and capitalism envisioned.
Contrary to other types of commonality, there are no apparent laws that distinctly define what constitutes a nation. A shared language and culture are typically necessary conditions. But it’s challenging to pinpoint this shared culture because we frequently observe just as much cultural diversity among groups within nations as we do across them. Thus, nationalism is a strange concept that permeates every aspect of life and seems ‘common sense’ on some level, yet is incredibly difficult to define.
Benedict Anderson maintained that contrary to what nationalists frequently say, nations are not ancient communities bound together by history, blood, language, culture, or geography, but rather by the very modern perception of a specific state’s population as making up such a standard community. Because they are simply too big for all of their members to know one another, nations must be considered imaginary communities. Systems of security, health, and welfare are developed along with educational, propagandist, and flag-waving machinery in order to foster a sense of community.
This division has posed a danger to humanity as it devalues anyone who doesn’t live in your country. It retards efforts to alleviate poverty throughout the world as only the people are counted. Devastating conflicts like the world wars, Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, and China’s threats to Taiwan, all emerge from extreme nationalism.
Given that the whole of humankind with all people in it share common challenges and opportunities, why do Europeans, Americans, Russians, and numerous other groups turn towards nationalist isolation? Loyalty is constructed towards an imagined nation but why not be loyal to the global community? This would not only diminish the created hostilities among humans but will also help to create a more progressive and equal society.
