In the French Revolution, the indigent French population was severely underrepresented in government, and the higher classes could dictate their own conditions of life. The belief that all men should be treated equally - which came about as a result of the high class' abuse - spread through the population of the third estate. This idea united them and brought them to sign their own constitution and create a new France. In Meiji-era Japan, the Japanese were threatened by the rise of western, industrial power. Because they didn't want to be swallowed up by the West like other nations had, the Japanese depended on their nationalistic pride to reform the government. In the Meiji Restoration, Japan's belief that it could catch up with the Western world pushed them to do just that, industrializing themselves and assimilation Western custom in a fraction of the time it took Europe. In China, a movement against the culture of the Manchu prompted the Taiping Rebellion. People were convinced that the Manchu were enemies and invaders, and this idea joined them under a purpose.
Wednesday, January 20, 2010
Nationalism
Nationalism is a unifying movement in which a group of people identify with each other under a common culture, sense of pride, or set of beliefs. While not a definitive standard of nationalism, in the majority of the cases we've studied, nationalism has come about as a response to a threat that the people of a nation collectively unite against.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
This is a great definition of nationalism, and you supported it well with evidence from across the centuries. In addition to what you have already stated, I would say that if there is no opposition or enemy force against which the people can be united, it is necessary for them to create one. So, for example, when nationalism flourished in Britain, France, and Italy, the three weren't necessarily enemies to begin with, but nationalism put them in a competition of sorts for colonies. It became an "us against the world" mentality, which really fed the fire of nationalism.
ReplyDeleteI liked your connection from nationalism to some sort of external or internal threat. It's a very good point and you used a wide range of examples to back it up. However, I think you could have expanded on the first sentence a little bit, rather than just the second part of your definition.
ReplyDeleteYou have a very strong claim, and backed it up well with good examples. I like that you relate events from different parts of the world to support your idea. The more nationalism throughout the world, the more competition, in a sense.
ReplyDelete