Nationalism

Few forces have shaped modern history more profoundly than nationalism. It has dissolved empires and created states, inspired liberation movements and fueled genocides, unified populations and torn societies apart. Understanding nationalism—its varieties, drivers, and consequences—remains essential for comprehending contemporary politics, from the rise of populist movements in Western democracies to ethnic conflicts in the Global South to great power competition between China, Russia, and the West.

The numbers alone suggest nationalism’s power. In 1900, approximately 50 sovereign states existed; today there are 193 United Nations member states, nearly all claiming to represent a nation. The post-Cold War period alone witnessed the creation of over 30 new states, from the former Soviet republics to South Sudan (2011). Each reflected nationalism’s core premise: that peoples with distinct identities deserve political self-determination.

What Is Nationalism?¶

At its simplest, nationalism is the belief that the nation should be the primary unit of political organization. This seemingly straightforward claim contains several contested elements:

The nation is not the same as the state. A state is a political-legal entity with territory, government, and sovereignty. A nation is a community that believes itself to share a common identity—typically based on language, culture, history, ethnicity, religion, or some combination thereof. Nationalism demands that these two align: that every nation should have its own state, and every state should contain one nation. Yet this demand immediately generates problems: an estimated 5,000 to 8,000 distinct ethnic groups exist worldwide, while only 193 states accommodate them. Roughly 10% of the world’s population—over 750 million people—identify with ethnic minorities within their states.

Political primacy means that loyalty to the nation supersedes other affiliations—class, religion, family, ideology. The nationalist asks first: what serves my nation? Other considerations follow. This prioritization explains nationalism’s power to mobilize sacrifice: in World War I, working-class Germans and working-class Frenchmen killed each other by the millions rather than uniting along class lines as Marxists had predicted.

Self-determination extends logically from nationalist premises. If nations are the legitimate units of politics, then each nation has the right to govern itself. This principle has justified both liberation from colonial rule and separatist movements that fragment existing states. Woodrow Wilson’s championing of self-determination after World War I shaped the creation of new states from Poland to Czechoslovakia, though the principle’s application remained selective and its implementation often violent.

The scholar Benedict Anderson famously described nations as “imagined communities”—not because they are unreal, but because members of even the smallest nation will never meet most of their fellow nationals, yet they imagine themselves as part of a bounded community with shared fate. This imagination is constructed through education, media, symbols, and the stories a society tells about itself. Anderson emphasized the role of “print capitalism”—newspapers and novels in vernacular languages—in creating the simultaneity of experience that enabled people to imagine themselves as part of a national community.

Types of Nationalism¶

Nationalism manifests in multiple forms, each with distinct political implications:

Civic nationalism defines the nation by shared political values, institutions, and citizenship rather than ethnic or cultural identity. France’s revolutionary nationalism—embodied in the Declaration of the Rights of Man and Citizen (1789)—American constitutional patriotism, and post-war German identification with democratic institutions (Verfassungspatriotismus) exemplify this variant. In principle, anyone can become a member of the nation by adopting its values and gaining citizenship. France naturalizes approximately 100,000 people annually; the United States naturalizes over 800,000—both reflecting civic conceptions of membership.

Ethnic nationalism defines the nation by ancestry, blood, and cultural heritage. One is born into the nation; outsiders cannot fully join regardless of legal citizenship. This form predominates in much of Central and Eastern Europe, parts of Asia, and wherever national identity formed through struggle against foreign rule. Germany’s citizenship law until 2000 was based primarily on jus sanguinis (right of blood) rather than jus soli (birthright), enabling ethnic Germans from Russia to claim citizenship while excluding Turkish families resident for generations. Japan maintains one of the world’s most restrictive naturalization processes, naturalizing only 8,000-10,000 people annually despite a population of 125 million.

Religious nationalism fuses national and religious identity. Zionism, Hindu nationalism in India (Hindutva), and various forms of political Islam blend theological and national claims. For adherents, the nation has divine sanction; its territory is sacred; its enemies are enemies of God. India’s Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), governing continuously since 2014, has promoted Hindu identity as constitutive of Indian nationhood—a departure from the secular nationalism of India’s founding Congress Party. Israel’s 2018 Nation-State Law declared that “the right to exercise national self-determination in the State of Israel is unique to the Jewish people,” constitutionalizing religious nationalism.

Economic nationalism prioritizes national economic interests over global efficiency, advocating protection of domestic industries, control over key sectors, and resistance to foreign economic influence. This variant has resurged dramatically with geoeconomic competition and supply chain vulnerabilities. The United States’ Inflation Reduction Act (2022), with $369 billion in clean energy subsidies tied to domestic content requirements, represents economic nationalism applied to industrial policy. China’s “Made in China 2025” targets 70% self-sufficiency in critical technologies. The European Union’s proposed Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism uses environmental policy to protect domestic industry.

Cultural nationalism emphasizes preservation of national traditions, language, and heritage against homogenizing global influences. This form often manifests as resistance to immigration, foreign media, or international institutions perceived as threatening distinctive identity. France’s Academie Francaise has fought to preserve French from English infiltration since 1635. Quebec’s language laws mandate French in business and public signage. Hungary under Viktor Orban has explicitly framed immigration restriction as defense of Christian civilization against Islamic influence.

In practice, these types overlap and blend. Most nationalisms combine elements of civic and ethnic definition; economic and cultural concerns intertwine with identity politics. Contemporary Russian nationalism, for instance, blends ethnic (Russian speakers), religious (Orthodox Christianity), civilizational (“Russian World”), and geopolitical elements into a potent mixture.

Historical Development¶

Modern nationalism emerged from specific historical conditions, evolving through distinct phases:

The French Revolution (1789) transformed subjects into citizens and proclaimed that sovereignty resided in the nation rather than the monarch. The levee en masse of 1793—the first mass military conscription in modern history—mobilized 750,000 men under the banner of national defense. The revolutionary armies that swept across Europe carried this idea with them, even as they imposed French rule that would generate nationalist resistance. Napoleon’s conquests inadvertently spread nationalism to peoples who discovered their own identity through opposition to French domination.

Romanticism in the early nineteenth century celebrated folk cultures, national languages, and distinctive traditions against Enlightenment universalism. German thinkers like Johann Gottfried Herder (1744-1803) and Johann Gottlieb Fichte (1762-1814) articulated the concept of the Volk—the people as an organic community with its own spirit expressed through language and culture. Fichte’s “Addresses to the German Nation” (1808), delivered during French occupation, helped create German national consciousness. The Brothers Grimm collected folktales; composers like Wagner created national myths in music; philologists standardized national languages.

Nation-building in the nineteenth century saw deliberate construction of national identities through mass education, military conscription, national media, and state symbolism. As historian Eugen Weber demonstrated in “Peasants into Frenchmen” (1976), as late as 1863 roughly a quarter of France’s population spoke no French at all—Breton, Occitan, Basque, and other languages dominated regional life. Universal primary education (made compulsory in France in 1882), military service, railways connecting remote regions to Paris, and the spread of newspapers created the unified French nation we take for granted today. Italy’s unification in 1860-1871 faced similar challenges; Prime Minister Massimo d’Azeglio reportedly observed, “We have made Italy. Now we must make Italians.”

The World Wars demonstrated nationalism’s destructive potential while simultaneously intensifying it. World War I, expected to last weeks, became four years of industrial slaughter as national mobilization produced armies of millions. The war’s aftermath saw the dissolution of the Austro-Hungarian, Ottoman, Russian, and German empires and the creation of new nation-states from Poland to Yugoslavia to Czechoslovakia. Yet the principle of national self-determination proved impossible to apply cleanly: ethnic populations overlapped, borders satisfied no one, and the interwar period saw nationalism fuel fascism’s rise in Italy (1922), Germany (1933), and Spain (1936-1939).

Decolonization in the twentieth century extended the nationalist principle globally. Anti-colonial movements from India (independence 1947) to Algeria (1962) to Vietnam (1954, unified 1975) demanded self-determination, adapting European nationalist ideas to their own contexts. The number of sovereign states exploded from roughly 50 in 1945 to 99 by 1960 and 159 by 1990. Africa alone went from 4 independent states in 1945 to 54 today. Yet colonial boundaries, drawn by Europeans with little regard for ethnic realities, often grouped disparate peoples into single states while dividing ethnic communities across borders—creating conditions for ethnic conflict that persist today.

Post-cold-war resurgence followed the collapse of communist ideology. In the former Soviet Union and Yugoslavia, nationalism filled the ideological vacuum, sometimes with catastrophic results. Yugoslavia’s disintegration produced wars in Slovenia (1991), Croatia (1991-1995), Bosnia (1992-1995), and Kosovo (1998-1999) that killed over 140,000 people and displaced millions. The Soviet Union’s dissolution into 15 successor states generally proceeded peacefully, but nationalist conflicts erupted in Nagorno-Karabakh, Chechnya, Georgia, and Moldova—conflicts that continue today. Meanwhile, globalization’s disruptions generated nationalist backlash in established democracies, setting the stage for the populist surge of the 2010s.

Drivers of Contemporary Nationalism¶

Several forces fuel nationalism’s current prominence:

Globalization backlash responds to economic displacement, cultural change, and perceived sovereignty erosion. Workers who lost jobs to outsourcing, communities transformed by immigration, and citizens who feel distant from transnational institutions often turn to nationalist movements promising to restore control.

Identity politics has intensified across the political spectrum. As older sources of meaning—religion, class, community—weaken, national identity offers belonging and purpose. The nationalist can answer the question “who am I?” with clarity.

Migration and demographic change trigger anxiety about cultural continuity and national character. Both real and perceived changes in population composition become mobilizing issues for nationalist movements.

Great power competition makes nationalism strategically useful. Beijing promotes “national rejuvenation”; Moscow invokes Russian civilization against Western decadence; nationalist rhetoric features in American debates about China and trade. States cultivate nationalism to legitimize their rule and mobilize populations.

Digital amplification enables nationalist messages to spread rapidly, form online communities, and bypass traditional media gatekeepers. Social media algorithms that maximize engagement tend to favor emotionally resonant content—and nationalism provides powerful emotional appeals.

Nationalism’s Double Edge¶

Nationalism has served both liberation and oppression:

Positive functions include providing social cohesion, enabling collective action, motivating sacrifice for common goods, and offering dignity to peoples formerly subordinated. The anti-colonial movements that ended European empires drew on nationalist sentiment; without nationalism, modern democracy might never have developed.

Destructive manifestations include ethnic cleansing, genocide, and aggressive war. The same force that unified Italy and Germany also produced fascism. The nationalism that liberated colonies sometimes turned against internal minorities. From Armenian genocide to the Holocaust to Rwanda, nationalism at its worst has enabled humanity’s greatest crimes.

This ambivalence is not accidental. Nationalism’s power derives from its ability to define an “us”—but every “us” implies a “them.” How the boundary is drawn, and what treatment “they” receive, determines whether nationalism unifies or destroys.

Contemporary Manifestations¶

Nationalism takes distinctive forms across regions, shaped by each nation’s particular history and circumstances:

In the United States, “America First” nationalism challenges liberal internationalism, emphasizing border control, trade protection, and skepticism of alliances and international institutions. Donald Trump’s 2016 campaign crystallized sentiments that had been building for decades among Americans who felt globalization had benefited coastal elites while devastating manufacturing communities. The percentage of Americans who believed trade was good for the economy fell from 72% in 2015 to 52% by 2016 in some polls. Immigration became the signature nationalist issue: Trump’s call for a border wall resonated with voters concerned about demographic change (the foreign-born population had risen from 7.9% in 1990 to 13.7% by 2017). This represents a departure from the post-1945 consensus in which American leadership of the international order served American interests.

In Europe, nationalist parties have grown from fringe movements to governing partners in multiple countries. Marine Le Pen’s Rassemblement National won 41.5% in France’s 2022 presidential runoff; Italy’s Fratelli d’Italia (Brothers of Italy) won the 2022 election with 26% of the vote; Sweden Democrats entered government for the first time in 2022 with 20.5% support; Hungary’s Fidesz has governed since 2010; Poland’s Law and Justice (PiS) governed from 2015 to 2023. Immigration, EU sovereignty constraints, and cultural change drive support—the 2015 migration crisis, which saw over 1 million asylum seekers reach Europe, proved particularly catalytic. Yet European nationalism is fragmented: Hungarian nationalism centers on Trianon Treaty grievances and protection of ethnic Hungarians abroad; French nationalism emphasizes laicite and resistance to both Islamism and Brussels; Swedish nationalism focuses on integration failures in immigrant-heavy suburbs.

In India, Hindu nationalism under the BJP challenges the secular founding principles of the Indian state, defining India as a Hindu nation in which religious minorities hold uncertain status. Prime Minister Narendra Modi, a lifelong RSS (Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh) member, has governed since 2014, winning re-election in 2019 with an increased majority. Policies including the Citizenship Amendment Act (2019), which fast-tracks citizenship for non-Muslim refugees from neighboring countries, and the revocation of Kashmir’s special status have institutionalized Hindu nationalist priorities. This represents the largest democratic experiment in religious nationalism, affecting over 1.4 billion people, including approximately 200 million Muslims who comprise India’s largest religious minority.

In China, the Communist Party has increasingly relied on nationalism to legitimize its rule as communist ideology fades. Xi Jinping’s “Chinese Dream” of national rejuvenation explicitly invokes the “century of humiliation” (1839-1949) when foreign powers dominated China. Historical grievances, territorial claims in the South China Sea and regarding Taiwan (which Beijing views as a wayward province), and great power status aspirations all feature in official nationalism. “Patriotic education” campaigns intensified after the 1989 Tiananmen protests, and nationalist sentiment now constrains Beijing’s diplomatic flexibility—public opinion would not tolerate perceived weakness on Taiwan or the Senkaku/Diaoyu Islands.

In Russia, nationalism has become intertwined with imperial nostalgia, Orthodox Christianity, and resistance to Western values. Putin’s February 2022 essay denying Ukrainian nationhood—titled “On the Historical Unity of Russians and Ukrainians”—and his justification for the invasion drew heavily on nationalist themes. Russian nationalism claims Ukraine as an integral part of the “Russian World” (Russkiy Mir), frames the conflict as defense against Western encirclement, and positions Russia as defender of traditional values against liberal decadence. The Russian Orthodox Church has blessed the war as a spiritual struggle. This nationalism justifies territorial expansion while legitimizing authoritarian rule at home.

The Future of Nationalism¶

Several scenarios might unfold:

Nationalist competition could intensify, fragmenting global governance, disrupting trade, and raising conflict risks. A world of competing nationalisms might resemble the early twentieth century—with the difference that nuclear weapons make great power war catastrophic.

Civic nationalism might revive, offering inclusive national identities that maintain social cohesion without ethnic exclusion. This would require sustained political effort to define national identity in ways that accommodate diversity.

Post-national forms could emerge as climate change, technology, and economic integration create challenges that transcend national boundaries. But the demise of nationalism has been predicted before—usually by those who underestimated its emotional power.

Hybrid equilibrium seems most likely: nationalism remains powerful but is constrained by interdependence, institutions, and competing identities. States navigate between nationalist pressures and international requirements, satisfying neither fully.

What remains certain is that nationalism—for better and worse—will continue to shape politics. Those who understand its appeals, varieties, and dangers will be better equipped to navigate the world it creates.

Sources & Further Reading¶

• Imagined Communities: Reflections on the Origin and Spread of Nationalism by Benedict Anderson — The foundational scholarly work explaining how nations are socially constructed through print media, education, and shared narratives.

• Nations and Nationalism by Ernest Gellner — A sociological analysis arguing that nationalism emerged from the requirements of industrial society, not from primordial ethnic bonds.

• The Virtue of Nationalism by Yoram Hazony — A contemporary defense of nationalism as the foundation of self-government and liberty, presenting the case against globalist alternatives.

• Ethnic Groups in Conflict by Donald L. Horowitz — Comprehensive analysis of how ethnic and national identities generate conflict, essential for understanding nationalism’s destructive potential.