Nationalism or Patriotism?

      An interesting article published in Al Ghad newspaper two days ago reminded me of national songs we used to sing at the school assembly every morning. The writer contemplates patriotism, and its extreme manifestation in the Arab world, giving accurate examples that no Arab reader can deny. The writer raises questions about the deep love affair an Arab citizen has with his country, contrasting this unconditional love he or she has to offer with that of a citizen from a developed country. The writer's embarrassment with this exaggerated emotion perhaps drove him to declare that the nation is an unnecessary term for developed countries as it is one nostalgic term, used only when the country is threatened. Unlike the case of an Arab country, no one in Sweden would be shouting patriotic slogans in a demonstration. The writer stressed the need to redefine the concept of a "nation" in the Arab world, in a less romantic form, where instead of having the citizen fight and die for the patria, instead of being obliged to demonstrate his or her love to the mother land, and instead of offering all to his country, the state should be the one serving and protecting its citizens.

    Good. The writer obviously raises important points and draws excellent observations about Arab patriotism. Nonetheless, his ideas- albeit sharp and shrewdly sarcastic- bear some criticism.

       To start with, the writer uses the terms nationalism and patriotism interchangeably, whilst they are not the same concept. In the 19^th century, Lord Acton contrasted nationality and patriotism as affection and instinct vs. a moral relation. Nationality is “our connection with the race” that is “merely natural or physical,” while patriotism is the awareness of our moral duties to the political community (Acton 1972, 163). George Orwell contrasted the two in terms of aggressive vs. defensive attitudes. Nationalism is about power: its adherent wants to acquire as much power and prestige as possible for his nation, in which he submerges his individuality. While nationalism is accordingly aggressive, patriotism is defensive: it is a devotion to a particular place and a way of life one thinks best, but has no wish to impose on others (Orwell 1968, 362).  Nationalism raises questions about the concept of a nation or national identity and whether sovereignty entails the acquisition of full statehood with complete authority, while patriotism is related to loyalty to the political entity called the state.

    The Arab nation, that of common ancestry, history, and a set of cultural traits, is a romantic and nostalgic ideal that many Arabs long for. Whether to revive of the Islamic glory or to solve the state of underdevelopment, corruption and backwardness, the magical solution to many ordinary citizens and political activists is the establishment of a unified Arab nation-state.

      When citizens demonstrate in the street, expressing their love and valor to their country, what they are really calling out for is love for Arab nationalism. When the writer draws comparison between Sweden and an Arab country, for example Jordan, where in the former citizens find it unnecessary to hit high notes in national melodies on every other occasion, while in the latter citizens constantly remind their governments that they are willing to sacrifice their lives for their country, an element of threat was left out of the comparison. Whilst Sweden lives in complete and utter safety, Jordan (and other Arab states) is under constant threat of foreign domination or even annihilation. While Sweden houses the Swedish nation under its nation-state, Jordan houses a sub-national group imposed by western powers following World War I. Jordanians, identify themselves first as Arabs, then as Jordanians, and those further to the fundemental side, identify themselves as Muslims and then as Arabs. Segmenting a nation to separate and independent sub-nations should, and does, cause nostalgic and romantic longings by citizens.  And lastly, the historic development of Sweden and the peace it has long achieved explain the moderate patriotism it enjoys, while the constant state of war in the Arab world inflames feelings, whether religious feelings or patriotic feelings.

     Patriotism is most importantly expressed in a readiness to die and to kill for one's country. But a country is not a discernible collection of discernible individuals, it is rather an abstraction, a compound actual and imaginary ingredients. Therefore patriotism is a readiness to die and to kill for an abstraction. This abstraction, which might be viewed as highly irrational, constitutes an important component in an Arab citizen’s pride in his history, especially amidst the current state of backwardness that the nation is living in. This irrational romanticism of one’s patria cannot be solved, as the writer suggests, by creating modern, democratic and efficient state institutions that serve the citizens -and not the other way around only, but by addressing the core call of citizens: self-determination. Arab citizens, unlike their Swedish counterparts, have no say in determining the territorial demarcation of their nation. The French live in France, the Italians in Italy, the Spanish in Spain, they why not Arabs in Arabia? Why can Catalans demand their right of self determination while 350 million Arabs cannot? The sense of historic, moral, cultural and religious involvement between Arab citizens is tamed and controlled by governments, and the patriotic and nationalistic calls are but a reminder of the much longed for Arab solidarity.

     Extreme patriotism, and nationalism, do have their dangers, and might be immoral and outdated, and a tool to manipulate citizens and allow corruption and exploitation. Moderate patriotism and nationalism on the other hand are not uncritical, unconditional, or egocentric. What needs to be redefined, in my opinion, is not the concept of a nation or patria, but the intensity of nationalism and patriotism and the moral grounds they stand on. That will not and cannot be changed unless democracy prevails and the political culture matures. Only when citizens believe that they really have a say in the destiny of their country and the future of their nation would those inflamed feelings be quenched and rendered more moderate and rational.  

References

Acton, Lord (1972), “Nationality,” Essays on Freedom and Power, Gloucester: Peter Smith, 141–70.

Orwell, George (1968), “Notes on Nationalism,” Collected Essays, Journalism and Letters, Sonia Orwell and Ian Angus (eds.), London: Secker & Warburg, vol. 3, 361–80.