Published: 10:03 AM, 24 August 2026
Where Is the Paradox in the Concept of Nationalism?
Dr. Forqan Uddin Ahmed
The history of modern political thought contains an important chapter on Nationalism. Since the French Revolution, Nationalism has developed as a political philosophy and also as a force which has created the sense of identity, the desire for freedom and the right to self-determination of the people. Nationalism unites people under a common flag, creates a sense of common identity and encourages people to sacrifice for their country. The nation-state is an imagined community in which strangers imagine themselves as members of one nation, bound together by common symbols. Such imagination may at times be even more effective than reality in that it connects people to history, culture and myth. That provides the basis for the formation of the nation state. However, nationalism is by no means one-dimensional. It has a positive form that has enriched freedom, unity, culture and democracy. For oppressed nations nationalism has become a cry of battle for freedom. Nationalism inspired the non-violent movement of Mahatma Gandhi in India, the armed struggle of Netaji Subhas Chandra Bose and the Liberation War of Bangladesh. This was also the tradition of the Language Movement where language was not just a medium of communication, but the symbol of national identity for the people. So, the Shaheed Minar is not only a monument but symbolic memorial of Nationalism.
This type of nationalism has given dignity to the people and has contributed to the development of democratic consciousness. But there is another kind of nationalism which endangers civilization.
This perverse nationalism has produced imperialism, war and ethnic conflict as has been shown by history. Nationalism has been the basis of self-determination, independence and sovereignty in the history of political science, but on the other hand it has been the main source of chauvinism, racism, imperialism and war. It is this dual character which makes the debate on nationalism unending. Some see it as the engine of progress of human civilization, others as an intrinsic threat to modernity.
Nationalism as an idea is indeed a relatively modern idea. Nationalism is an unavoidable element of modern political thought for Eric Hobsbawm and Benedict Anderson. In reality, people never all know one another personally, yet they remain united through a shared imagination. This imagined unity is the basis of the modern state. In the case of Bangladesh also, the Language Movement and the Liberation War are the manifestation of an imagined community shaped through nationalist consciousness. But this imagination, as constructive can be divisive. Such nationalism has resulted in conflicts, as in the case of the partition of India and Pakistan, or racist nationalism in Europe . Nationalism is also inescapably tied up with capitalism and imperialism. Karl marx and Friedrich Engels saw nationalism primarily as a tool of the bourgeois class. For them, nationalism is often a disguise for class struggle, so that the working class cannot unite against its real enemy, the capitalist class. As Harold Laski said: "Nationalism is imperialism with power." What he meant is that strong states exploit weaker states in the name of nationalism and convert them into colonies. That leads to economic imperialism where people are poor but we have arms races and wars. So we can say that in the end, perverted nationalism becomes a tool of capitalist power.
The Indian struggle for independence, the anti-colonial movements in Africa and Latin America, and the Bangladesh Liberation War are examples of nationalism, inspired oppressed people to fight for freedom. Such nationalism is not a curse of modern civilization but a way to liberation.
There is a kind of nationalism that's really bad for the world. Rabindranath Tagore wrote on nationalism. In this he talks about nationalism negatively. He says this kind of nationalism stops people from growing. Tagore thinks that bad nationalism hurts friendships between countries. It makes people think they are better than others. It also makes people not like each other. This kind of nationalism is not new. Sometime, the Ancient Greeks thought they were better than everyone else. They called other people barbarians. Then Europe wanted to take over Africa. They treated Africa badly.
A man named Laski said that when a country gets powerful nationalism can turn into something worse. This happened a lot in the century. Countries wanted to be in charge of others. They wanted to make money and be powerful. The bad scenario of nationalism can be seen by looking at Hitler and Mussolini. They did bad things to people. Hitler wanted to make his country bigger. He wanted to kill people who did not like him. He thought his people the best. This led to a war. There are examples like this. That is why Bertrand Russell said that people need to stop fighting. If we do not stop fighting, fighting will destroy us. Nationalism is a problem. We need to be careful, about nationalism. We need to make sure it does not hurt people. The symbolic aspect of nationalism is equally important. The theory of the White Man’s Burden of Rudyard Kipling was used to justify colonialism by Europeans. As stated by Bertrand Russell, “Unless mankind abolishes war, war will abolish mankind.” This quotation helps us understand that the perverted version of nationalism which only destroys peace but also civilization itself.
But then, the concept of nationalism should not be confined within just negativity alone. There is a paradox in the concept of nationalism. While it brings people together, nationalism also creates distinctions. Nationalism in the country usually leads to oppression of the minority groups. The Sinhalese nationalism in Sri Lanka was the reason why the Tamils became deprived in the country. In the case of Bangladesh too, the meaning of nationalism at the state level keeps changing from time to time—either linguistic Bengali nationalism or Islamic nationalism, thus creating tension. These two characteristics prove that nationalism is basically a political phenomenon, which the ruling elite exploits for their own benefit. A second aspect of criticism refers to the compatibility between nationalism and internationalism.
According to cosmopolitanism, man does not belong to one nation alone but to the entire world at large. Immanuel Kant, in his essay Perpetual Peace, has put forward the view that “real peace would result when man goes beyond the narrow confines of his nationality and embraces universal morality.” As per this view, any kind of twisted nationalism is highly damaging to civilization since it restricts people to small confines and hampers world peace.
However, if nationalism is defined in terms of patriotism and cooperation, then it is also the basis of international cooperation. The issue of globalization in the modern period is presenting challenges to nationalism. On the one side, globalization under capitalism is challenging the borders of states; and on the other side, the emergence of nationalism in different ways, such as Brexit, the rise of Donald Trump's nationalism in America, and Hindutva in India, shows the vitality of nationalism in modern politics. It seems that under globalization, nationalism could either become a tool of resistance or lead to extremism. There are various theoretical approaches to understanding nationalism. For instance, Ernest Renan said that "the presence of a desire to live together constitutes the existence of a nation." According to Renan, a nation is neither a fixed ethnic nor geographic reality but rather it is a continuing act of voting, just like a daily plebiscite. Benedict Anderson, in his book Imagined Communities, showed that a nation is essentially an imagined community, constructed through the media, language, and history. This imagination can sometimes be inclusive and, at other times, exclusionary. Ernest Gellner viewed nationalism as a product of modern industrial society. According to him, an industrialized society requires cultural homogeneity, which nationalism provides. However, this very homogeneity often suppresses diversity and creates division.
Karl Marx was against nationalism on the grounds that it created false consciousness, as class differences amongst the workers were hidden through the medium of nationalism. Today, this criticism of Marx is valid since nationalism often distracts people from class oppression and traps them only into ethnic/national pride. In actual fact, the dualism of nationalism is best exemplified through anti-colonial struggles.
While on one side it played an important role in the liberation of the masses, as Gandhi, Nehru, Sukarno, Nasser, Maulana Bhasani and President Ziaur Rahman used nationalism to unite the people. On the other side, once the fight for freedom was won, nationalism in many cases turned into aggressive nationalism.
Formation of Pakistan was one such example of how nationalism based on religion split the state and gave birth to many more problems. Even the Liberation war of Bangladesh is one such case where language-based nationalism fought against religion-based nationalism. In spite of independence, till now there are debates in Bangladesh regarding the nature of nationalism whether it should be secular nationalism or Islamic nationalism.
Dr. Forqan Uddin Ahmed is
former Deputy Director
General, Bangladesh Ansar and
VDP. He is also a Rotary
Learning Facilitator in Rotary
Club, Dhaka Elite.
