Nation and Nationalism PDF

# Chapter 2: Nation and Nationalism The previous chapter stated that one of the major reasons behind the passage of the Rizal Law was the strong intent to instill nationalism in the hearts and minds of the Filipino youth. This chapter will now focus on nation and nationalism in the Philippine conte...

# Chapter 2: Nation and Nationalism The previous chapter stated that one of the major reasons behind the passage of the Rizal Law was the strong intent to instill nationalism in the hearts and minds of the Filipino youth. This chapter will now focus on nation and nationalism in the Philippine context. It will explain the concepts of nation, state, and nation-state as a precursor to understanding nationalism and the projects that lead to it. Likewise, the discussion will touch on some of Rizal's works that deal with nation and nationalism. The chapter also aims to reflect on nation-building in the Philippines which is a major force behind the passage of the Rizal Law. ## Learning Objectives At the end of this chapter, the students should be able to: - define nationalism in relation to the concepts of nation, state, and nation-state - appraise the development of nationalism in the country - explain the relevance of nationalism and nation-building at present. ## Definitions: - **bayan/banua** - indigenous Filipino concepts of community and territory that may be related to nationalism - **nation** - a group of people with a shared language, culture, and history - **nation-building** - a project undertaken with the goal of strengthening the bond of the nation - **nation-state** - a state ruling over a nation - **patriotism** - a feeling of attachment to one's homeland - **sovereignty** - the authority to govern a polity without external interference/incursions ## Nation, State, Nation-State To better understand nationalism, one must learn first the concepts of nation and nationhood as well as state and nation-state. | Nation | Nation-State | State | | :--------------- | :----------- | :--------------- | | A group of people | A state governing a nation | A political entity that wields sovereignty over a defined territory | | that shares a common culture, history, language, and other practices like religion, affinity to a place, etc. | | | Social scientists have fleshed out the nuances of nation, state, and nation-state. A nation is a community of people that are believed to share a link with one another based on cultural practices, language, religion or belief system, and historical experience, to name a few. A state, on the other hand, is a political entity that has sovereignty over a defined territory. States have laws, taxation, government, and bureaucracy - basically, the means of regulating life within the territory. This sovereignty needs diplomatic recognition to be legitimate and acknowledged internationally. The state's boundaries and territory are not fixed and change across time with war, sale, arbitration and negotiation, and even assimilation or secession. The nation-state, in a way, is a fusion of the elements of the nation (people/community) and the state (territory). The development of nation-states started in Europe during the periods coinciding with the Enlightenment. The *“classical"* nation-states of Europe began with the Peace of Westphalia in the seventeenth century. Many paths were taken towards the formation of the nation-states. In the *“classical"* nation-states, many scholars posit that the process was an evolution from being a state into a nation-state in which the members of the bureaucracy (lawyers, politicians, diplomats, etc.) eventually moved to unify the people within the state to build the nation-state. A second path was taken by subsequent nation-states which were formed from nations. In this process, intellectuals and scholars laid the foundations of a nation and worked towards the formation of political and eventually diplomatic recognition to create a nation-state. A third path taken by many Asian and African people involved breaking off from a colonial relationship, especially after World War II when a series of decolonization and nation-(re)building occurred. During this time, groups initially controlled by imperial powers started to assert their identity to form a nation and build their own state from the fragments of the broken colonial ties. A fourth path was by way of (sometimes violent) secessions by people already part of an existing state. Here, a group of people who refused to or could not identify with the rest of the population built a nation, asserted their own identity, and demanded recognition. In the contemporary world, the existing nation-states continuously strive with projects of nation-building especially since globalization and transnational connections are progressing. ## Nation and Nationalism As mentioned, one major component of the nation-state is the nation. This concept assumes that there is a bond that connects a group of people together to form a community. The origin of the nation, and concomitantly nationalism, has been a subject of debates among social scientists and scholars. In this section, three theories about the roots of the nation will be presented. The first theory traces the root of the nation and national identity to existing and deep-rooted features of a group of people like race, language, religion, and others. Often called primordialism, it argues that a national identity has always existed and nations have "ethnic cores." In this essentialist stance, one may be led to conclude that divisions of "us" and "them" are naturally formed based on the assumption that there exists an unchanging core in everyone. The second theory states that nation, national identity, and nationalism are products of the modern condition and are shaped by modernity. This line of thinking suggests that nationalism and national identity are necessary products of the social structure and culture brought about by the emergence of capitalism, industrialization, secularization, urbanization, and bureaucratization. This idea further posits that in pre-modern societies, the rigid social hierarchies could accommodate diversity in language and culture, in contrast with the present times in which rapid change pushes statehood to guard the homogeneity in society through nationalism. Thus, in the modernist explanation, nationalism is a political project. The third theory-a very influential explanation- about nation and nationalism maintains that these ideas are discursive. Often referred to as the constructivist approach to understanding nationalism, this view maintains that nationalism is socially constructed and imagined by people who identify with a group. Benedict Anderson argues that nations are "imagined communities" (2003). He traces the history of these imagined communities to the Enlightenment when European society began challenging the supposed divinely-ordained dynastic regimes of the monarchies. This idea was starkly exemplified by the Industrial Revolution and the French Revolution. The nation is seen as imagined because the people who affiliate with that community have a mental imprint of the affinity which maintains solidarity; they do not necessarily need to see and know all the members of the group. With this imagined community comes a "deep, horizontal comradeship" that maintains harmonious co-existence and even fuels the willingness of the people to fight and die for that nation. Anderson also puts forward the important role of mass media in the construction of the nation during that time. He underscores that the media (1) fostered unified fields of communication which allowed the millions of people within a territory to "know" each other through printed outputs and become aware that many others identified with the same community; (2) standardized languages that enhanced feelings of nationalism and community; and (3) maintained communication through a few languages widely used in the printing press which endured through time. ## Nation and Bayan In the Philippines, many argue that the project of nation-building is a continuing struggle up to the present. Considering the country's history, historians posit that the nineteenth century brought a tremendous change in the lives of the Filipinos, including the actual articulations of nation and nationhood that culminated in the first anti-colonial revolution in Asia led by Andres Bonifacio and the Katipunan. Furthermore, scholars note the important work of the propagandists like Rizal in the sustained efforts to build the nation and enact change in the Spanish colony. These themes will be discussed in the succeeding chapters. As you continue to familiarize yourselves with the concepts of nation and nationalism, it would be worthwhile to look at how these ideas have been articulated in the past as well as how scholars locate these efforts in the indigenous culture. Many Filipino scholars who endeavored to understand indigenous/local knowledge have identified concepts that relate to how Filipinos understand the notions of community and, to an extent, nation and nation-building. The works of Virgilio Enriquez, Prospero Covar, and Zeus Salazar, among others, attempted to identify and differentiate local categories for communities and social relations. The indigenous intellectual movements like Sikolohiyang Pilipino and Bagong Kasaysayan introduced the concepts of *kapwa* and *bayan* that can enrich discussions about nationalism in the context of the Philippines. *Kapwa* is an important concept in the country's social relations. Filipino interaction is mediated by understanding one's affinity with another as described by the phrases *“ibang tao"* and *"’di ibang tao." * In the formation and strengthening of social relations, the *kapwa* concept supports the notion of unity and harmony in a community. From this central concept arise other notions such as *“pakikipagkapwa,” “pakikisama,”* and *"pakikipag-ugnay," * as well as the collective orientation of Filipino culture and psyche. In the field of history, a major movement in the indigenization campaign is led by Bagong Kasaysayan, founded by Zeus Salazar, which advances the perspective known as Pantayong Pananaw. Scholars in this movement are among the major researchers that nuance the notion of *bayan* or *banua*. In understanding Filipino concepts of community, the *bayan* is an important indigenous concept. *Bayan/Banua*, which can be traced all the way to the Austronesian language family, is loosely defined as the territory where the people live or the actual community they are identifying with. Thus, *bayan/banua* encompasses both the spatial community as well as the imagined community. The concept of *bayan* clashed with the European notion of *nación* during the Spanish colonialism. The proponents of Pantayong Pananaw maintain the existence of a great cultural divide that separated the elite (*nación*) and the folk/masses (*bayan*) as a product of the colonial experience. This issue brings the project of nation-building to a contested terrain. Throughout Philippine history, the challenge of building the Filipino nation has persisted, impacted by colonialism, violent invasion during World War II, a dictatorship, and the perennial struggle for development. The succeeding chapters will look into the life and works of José Rizal and through them, try to map how historical events shaped the national hero's understanding of the nation and nationalism.