The Development of Nationalism

1 “[a] nation is formed by the simple addition of homonymous magnitudes” : The Development of Nationalism and Othering in 19th Century Europe Allison Brown Introduction to European Studies Dr. Blackler 21 February 2020 1Blackler, Adam “Franco-Prussian War Lecture” Marx, Karl. 12 February 2020 1 Ranging from a German’s notion ofFatherland a to the peasants of France in the mid19th century who understood, “La vie, one rien de tout ” 2nationalism was a driving force and a key factor of conflict in Europe before the turn of the millennium. But why did individuals who 3 partook in an “imagined community” feel such comradery to their state; felt devotion to the point of exclusionary actions and violence? Historian Benedict Anderson and others attempt to answer these questions and by doing so expose how European governments exploited nationalism to choose who does not belong in their community. Through hierarchical systems, the fall of dynastic realms and growing national identity states developed a national consciousness. This awakening allowed the government to utilize nationalism to determine the “others” in society to pursue their notion of what’s the preeminent way for their state to exist and ultimately to allow the centuries old status-quo of Europe to remain intact. To grasp how European governments and monarchs took advantage of populations through nationalism and “othering”, it is essential to understand how national consciousness originated in Europe. The collapse of dynastic realms and the unification of regions in Europe led to the fabrication of what Anderson refers to as “imagined communities”. These notions are all founded from the same core question: What is a nation? Anderson believes that a nation, “ … is an imagined political community, and is imagined as both inherently limited and sovereign. The state imagined is because the members of even the smallest nation will never know most of their fellow neighbors, meet them, or even hear of them, yet in the minds of each 4 lives the image of their communion.” Anderson views nations as having imagined demarcated 2 “A life of labor is easily dispensed with” Weber, Eugene. Peasants into Frenchmen: the Modernization of Rural _France, 1870-1914. Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1992 (p.15) 3 Anderson, Benedict R. OG. Imagined Communities. London, 1982 (p. xii) 4 Anderson, Benedict R. OG. Imagined Communities. London, 1982 (p.6) 2 states, individuals who reside within the borders have virtually no communication with all of their fellow-citizens, but nationalism binds the state together. An unfavorable force, nationalism has the ability to unite a nation on its best days and tear them apart on its worst. Understanding the latter, nationalism is nothing new; its origins tracing back to when states began developing national conciseness and even potentially earlier. But what makes individuals in the state experience the sensation of nationalism? In the case of Germany, their nationalist tendencies may have risen out of occupation or a primordial mindest. Nevertheless, a German’s love for theirFatherland was supposed to supercede all else according to Johann Gottleih Fichte, “A true German could only want to live in order to be, and to remain, just a 5 German and to bring up his children as Germans.” Nationalism discourages a member of society from serving their self-interest instead of that of their nation. Fichte further builds on this, “The natural impulse of man, which should be abandoned only in case of real necessity, is to find 6 heaven on this earth, and to endow his daily work on earth with permanence and eternity …” Fichte is declaring that an individual's life and legacy is finite, but a love for one’s country and nationalism is infinite, the Fatherland will live on. A German, or French, or Dutch is willing to live and die for their nation, but why? Is primordial nationalism so inherently developed or is it forcibly so that individuals defend their imagined community? Anderson believes that the core issue posed by nationalism “ … [is the concept of] what makes the shrunken imaginings of 7 recent history, scarcely more than two centuries, generate such colossal sacrifices?” An individual of a society is willing to forsake their own well-being to devote themselves to their 5 Fichte, Johann Gottlieb. “Addresses to the German Nation.” In Nations and Identities: Classic Readings, 1808 (p.116) 6 Fichte, Johann Gottlieb. “Addresses to the German Nation.” In Nations and Identities: Classic Readings, 1808 (p.123) 7 Anderson, Benedict R. OG. Imagined Communities. London, 1982 (p.7) 3 imagined community, this devotion can lead to even more detrimental consequences, such as collective “othering”. In 1882, the philosopher Ernest Renan noted a commonly made mistake in current French society; “Race is confused with nation and a sovereignty analogous to that of really existing 8 peoples is attributed to ethnographic … Race, ” a socially derived concept, and nationalism at the time were the defining factors of a person’s life; where they lived, worked, and worshiped were predetermined by the colour of their skin and who they kneel at the altar for. When an individual supposedly discerned their nation was threatened it was often an individual who stood out, an “other”.This different group in more instances than not was societally repressed or violently lashed out upon. An example of a diverse group that were socially subjugated to collective othering were the peasants of the 19th century French countryside. The terms peasant and “savage” were interchangeable to urban populations and French aristocrats. Because these countrymen were living in rural areas and struggled economically, they were an easy target to become the “other” for society. Eugene Weber inCountry a of Savages explains the shame that the rural population beared, “The rurals themselves agreed: it was demeaning to be a rural. To walk like a peasant or eat like a peasant was a sin … The poor will always be poor, and always oppressed and exploited …” 9 This mentality not only inhibited the rural populations but all of France as observed by Karl Marx; “Thus the great mass of the French nation is formed by the simple addition of 10 homonymous magnitudes, much as potatoes in a sack form a sack of potatoes.” In this excerpt, 8 Renan, Ernest. What Is a Nation?, 1882 (p.42) 9 Weber, Eugene. Peasants into Frenchmen: the Modernization of Rural France, 1870-1914. Stanford: Stanford _University Press, 1992 (p. 8 & 19) 10 Blackler, Adam “Franco-Prussian War Lecture” Marx, Karl. 12 February 2020 4 Marx is stating that France as a nation is not unified, but is instead a loss associate of multiple independent populations: royals, aristocrats, working-class citizens, and the rural peasants. These varying populations were not unified by nationalism. The collective “othering” of the peasants led to the mirage of a unified France on the world stage, but divided the state internally. An additional example of “othering” in a nation comes in a more grisly manner through Helmut Walser Smith’sThe Butcher’s Tale. Based in Konitz, Germany at the start of the 20th century, Smith’s work is a testament to the years of “othering” Jewish populations have been vulnerable to, the slandering dialogue that would occur, and the ramifications of their religious (not ethnic) differences; “It is impossible to discern the degree to which religion, or race, constituted the principal interpretive parametres people used … to keep separate what belongs separate, and to recognize a well-defined we opposed to, and distinct from, an increasingly alien they.” 11 Smith’s descriptions of anti-sematic views and blood libel help to colour the struggles that Jewish communities often faced, and the difficulties any “other” of a community experienced. “Diversity became imperfection, injustice, failure, something to be noted and to be remedied.”12 Whether it was rural France or Konitz, Germany; nationalism was wielded by the government to determine who belonged in their “imagined community”. By exploiting the differences of skin colours or religion, the government and members of internal communities had control over who was discluded from their nationality. French novelist Arthur de Gobineu understands that interpersonal interactions primarily take two forms, “Mankind lives in obedience to two laws, one of repulsion, the other of attraction; these act with different force on 11 Smith, Helmut Walser. In The Butchers Tale: Murder and Anti-Semitism in a German Town. New York: Norton, __2003 (p.84-85) 12 Renan, Ernest. What Is a Nation?, 1882 (p.10) 5 different people.”13 European monarchs and governments in the 19th century understood this notion, and through declarations and action at the national level, collective othering in states was encouraged and a way for members of a community to ensure their nation was only comprised of those who they deemed fit to belong. “For every effective nationalism, there are infinite potential ones14 …” A wide range of different “ethnicities”, “races”, and nationalities exist not only in Europe but globally. Nationalism was a requisite for states to generate social, cultural, and economic change throughout Europe in the 19th century. The comradery felt in an “imagined community” was gripping enough for a citizen to feel as though their identity belonged to their flag, their life’s legacy interchangeable with their nation’s. This intense devotion led to the collective “othering” of those who were dissimilar and often developed into systemic racism or violent acts against the minorities or poverty-stricken individuals in a society . Monarchs of Europe during the downfall of various dynastic realms understood that “Queqo’vous voulez, faut ben durer.” 15 In order for Europe’s traditional way of life to persist, nationalism had to not only remain intact, but needed to be stoked. Regardless of the toil and arduousness that would come in the following centuries, what mattered above all else was that nationalism survived; no matter the cost. 13 Gobineau, Arthur de. An Essay on the Inequality of the Human Races, 1853 (p.136) 14 Gellner, Ernest, and John Breuilly. In Nations and Nationalism. Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishing, 1983 (p.45) 15 “Whatever you want, you have to [make it] last” Weber, Eugene. Peasants into Frenchmen: the Modernization of __Rural France, 1870-1914. Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1992 (p.19)