Nationalism - New Perspective

By RAJESHWAR DEVKOTA

These days it has become more complex to define what nationalism is. Primarily, it is related to a feeling and sense of loyalty of an individual towards his or her country. Some may be adhering to the rules and practices of a particular country expressing even his loyalty but nowadays that is not sufficient to claim oneself as a nationalist. One is to be judged by his or her degree of devotion towards the nation and spirit of sacrifice for its cause. One can be perfect citizen having these qualities. But today nationalism is expected to be reflected in the organization of a state and in the state of mind of well-organized countrymen. One individual nationalist is only patriotic if his or her country is not nationally organized. A patriot may sacrifice for nation's cause but cannot fight to protect nation and its culture alone.

Secularism is equally important basic criteria of nationalism, which is generally accepted by all as principle but practiced by least. Who is secular today then? Individually, there may be many who have true secular mind but is the very soil of their particular country now free of infection of some bias? That may be religious, racial or regional that is manifested in some or other form. With the advancement of science and technology, particularly in the field of communication and transport, the world population was expected more to mingle with each other. But contrary to that logical expectation men or nations are drifting away from each other and becoming more strangers than ever before. Technological achievements have been made an effective means of exploitation. Directly or remotely targeted prey of exploitation may be one's own countryman or other countries. It has generated hatred, which is getting deep roots into the hearts of those who feel hated this way. Receiving an aid or help will not be considered dignified any more. So far the present system of production and distribution is working, the receiver is bound to digest it painfully. The atmosphere is created now that does not help. Hatred is brewing softly which may one day be quite acute.

Big men in authority anywhere and rich nations in the map wherever are too small and poor to gauge that relationship, which is sure to multiply like cancer.

Let the self-claimed developed and civilized men or nations understand the inner current under the calm surface, which now seem only bubbling sometimes and somewhere.

Here and now it would be suggestive to point out clearly as follows:

1. First of all, the question of disparity between haves and have-nots at the same time between rich and poor nations is serious.

2. Let us accept that there is religious discrimination and that feeling of superiority of one's own religion is getting rooted even in the developed and modern nations.

3. Undoubtedly, there is growing exploitation of resources of the earth by the so-called industrialized nations.

4. Copyright system or regulation is another vulgar act of modern man. This system has encouraged patenting of even the natural property still commonly used by all.

These are the major considerations. There are many other minor irritants. Those things mentioned above existed in past as well. But they are growing with the pace of development. So how can one claim that this third millennium is new, when it is only promoting the old legacy with greater intensity?

To some, it may seem the remarks to be quite blunt but to the oppressed majority it is an expression of their real feelings. But the majority has no voice. Neither it can organize media communication system in its favor, nor it can buy experts to communicate its grievances. Democracy has become a nice prey of those efficient who can propagate it as well as their ideals by concealing the real motive.

Hitler's nationalism was not merely a racism but also designed to fulfill his own sinister ambition. Today's nationalism also lacks the principle. Where is secularism today? Is it not the Christianity as major force that has united Europe and made a union above all other common interests? This is more successful and dynamic organization today as compared to other regional and economic organizations.

Christian sentiment is working well among the Christians whereas their respective nations are supposed to protect that sentiment.

Before defining nationalism it would be suggestive to go into the changing meaning of the nation. Today a geographic boundary unit of a land is treated as nation irrespective of its history and cultural unity of people. This type of nation is very vulnerable and may disintegrate any moment. In the days to come, for a nation to remain as a nation, the history and culture will be the determining factors, but still some of the nations are united by force. In the recent past, nations of this nature were disintegrated whenever the force became too weak to guard the unity. Anyway, the very meaning of nation and nationalism is changing with the times and events.

Secularism, the second criteria of nationalism seems quite vague. To make it meaningful there must be propounded a third criteria, namely, universal socialism. Acceptance of this principle of universal socialism may help us to dream of a civilized social society.

If we go on continuing the old legacy of past two millennia even in this third millennium we will only add more inputs to boost the tendency of global revolt.

Then what is meant by civilized socialist society? Exploitation of a man by man or of a nation by another nation cannot be a sign of civilization. It is a heinous act of modern man. All the people of this era understand what is exploitation: only they are unable to counteract.

This third millennium seems very dull and poor having no heroes, fighters, philosophers and history. All the dwarfs are ruling the universe who think of the world individually in their own terms. There is no one as the source of inspiration. After fighting for full one thousand years for their religious superiority till the end of eighteenth century, Christians and Muslims should have realized that they propounded the principle of secularism as an ingredient of nationalism. During the last two centuries the seeds of state revolutions, which were sown at the end of eighteenth century, sprouted and spread all over the world.

At that time many big men appeared in the scene and promoted the message of revolution. But that line seems fading by the end of twentieth century. What is the message of twenty first century? What philosophy is guiding the people of this world? In fact, all seem guided by their own commercial interests. This is, indeed, an era of pessimism, which reflects, in different types of insurgencies and revolts almost everywhere. All these revolts may be genuine manifestations of dissatisfaction of masses but that does not promote any philosophy.

Therefore, it is imperative to promote the idea of universal socialist society to enrich the sense of nationalism and internationalism. Of course, the rich nations are helping the needy. But that appears to be only a display of personality of the contributor. It does not create any conducive atmosphere to bring the two parties nearer. Today men aspire for rights not for donations.

Patenting of skills and new achievements is very inhuman. From the dawn of history it has been a common property. This way, modern men are creating a small and selfish trader society instead of developing an ideal nationality. Any way, it is not the sign of civility and modernism.

As this large world has shrunk into a village, the nations have strayed away from their own destinations individually instead of coming closer to an agreeable common point of interest. Thus, ironically this world has become a box of paradox.

In summing up, I would elaborate my theme of universal socialist society, as proposed above, as the third criteria of nationalism.

(Devkota is the Chairman of Rastriya Prajatantra Party - Nationalist)