Introduction
Nationalism is a prominent topic in postcolonial discourse because of its close association with the concept of a colony as opposed to a country. As colonial empires ceased to exist and their former domains achieved independence, they attempted to unify around the idea of the state, introducing nationalism for the purpose. However, numerous issues emerged due to this approach, which may have contributed to the struggling development of some of these nations.
Moreover, postcolonial narratives frequently discuss cultural differences and the inadequacy of the Western understanding of society and politics for describing the situations of other countries. As such, the school of thought also challenges the notion that Western nationalism is the sole form of the phenomenon. This essay will discuss the dangers of nationalism, as seen from the postcolonial perspective, as well as the answers to the issue that it proposes.
Postcolonialism and the History of Nationalism
It is generally accepted in historical theory that the East and the West have developed substantially differently, with diverging cultures, political systems, and systems of social interaction. However, various developments enabled the West to take a dominant position in the world’s structure throughout the colonial era and much of the period that followed. This position of power has led to the emergence of the idea of the West’s superiority in various social developments.
However, according to Seth (2019), postcolonialism challenges both the conception of a fundamental difference that makes the West superior and the idea that developing nations have not yet advanced enough to embrace the Western model. Instead, the claim put forward in postcolonial thought is that non-Western countries have formulated unique ways of perceiving the world that is as viable as those used in the West.
The proposition would imply that it is inappropriate to view the development of non-Western nations through the scope of Western history. As a result, the Western notion of nationalism would not necessarily apply, either, and the term has to be defined within the confines of the local culture. Inuconda (2019) provides the example of India, which has developed nationalistic tendencies in the private sphere rather than the public one, as is generally the case in the West. In Indian society, the members of the lower societal tiers wanted to increase their involvement in the nation’s governance, which they saw as being disproportionately controlled by the upper castes. As a result, the concept of a shared identity that is often used by governments in Western systems as a part of nationalistic discourse was weakened, though it was prominent among citizens.
The Dangers of Nationalism in Former Colonies
As the desire for independence in various colonies increased, their populations often unified in the effort to reach that goal. As such, they entered their postcolonial period as unified bodies based on the conception of the nation, which naturally fostered nationalistic tendencies that were patterned after the Western model. As Sadiq (2017) explains, they used the jus soli conception of citizenship, providing rights to anyone born on the colony’s soil regardless of ethnicity. However, this concept was only sustainable when the people of the newly formed nations were focused on their former sovereign. As their attention shifted to internal issues, the significant differences between the different ethnicities that were present in the territory of the former colony became apparent.
When colonial nations divided territories into their new possessions, they were generally unconcerned with the ethnicities that lived there. Postcolonial societies typically followed this distribution, and, as a result, members of many societal groups formed countries together. As a result, when different political bodies mobilized ethnicity in their attempts to obtain power, the nationalism that emerged in these nations became characterized by conflicts and xenophobia, both against the white natives and other local groups (Cornelissen, Cheru, & Shaw, 2016).
Various damaging events and political systems, such as the apartheid in South Africa, emerged as the result of ethnic and racial conflicts. These issues can be attributed to the focus on the national idea without a resolution for the underlying disputes. As such, nationalism can be seen as dangerous for postcolonial nations due to its tendency to shift attention away from important issues and let them develop unchecked.
Postcolonialism and Cosmopolitanism
A logical solution for the issue presented above would be for the various communities that lived on the territory of the colony to address their differences and find a unifying factor before achieving independence. On a broader scale, the same ideas would apply worldwide, with nationalism being a dangerous ideology that promotes conflict instead of achieving positive results. The alternative would be cosmopolitanism or the idea that people and the relations between them should be at the center of the worldwide society rather than different states. It is possible to find postcolonial scholars such as Spencer (2017) that explicitly support and promote it. They encourage the reduction in the importance of the nation through increases in the power of supranational institutions. In this case, the ultimate goal is to establish a worldwide network of solidarity between individuals and societies.
However, not all postcolonial researchers believe that the world is moving toward a universal cosmopolitan framework or supporting such a transition. Miller and Ury (2016) provide the example of Professor Pheng Cheah, who has posited that emerging cosmopolitanism exists alongside a new model of postcolonial nationalism. In such a framework, the nation-state still exists and opposes global capitalism, the nation prevents its subordination to the same system, and cosmopolitanism negates state authoritarianism and national unification (Katz, 2018). As a result, the state contributes to global progress while still protecting its autonomy to some degree. This conception alleviates some of the concerns about globalization and cosmopolitan society, such as the concentration of power worldwide in the hands of a small wealthy minority and the loss of diversity. As such, nationalism may continue to exist and become a beneficial force in the postcolonial narrative despite its problems.
Conclusion
The postcolonial school of thought identifies several issues in nationalism that make it a dangerous force. The Western perception of nationalism may be a part of a broader culture-specific view, and its extrapolations to other cultures may lead to significant misinterpretations. India, in particular, appears to have followed a pattern of nationalism that diverges from the definitions generally used in Western political discourse. Additionally, the application of the Western, state-centric nationalism model led to ethnic conflicts and the emergence of xenophobic cultures, and severe social issues in many former colonies. Postcolonial thought posits that such events are necessary parts of nationalism that will eventually lead to the disappearance of the practice. However, some scholars suggest a different possibility, in which the ideology will adapt to become a positive force that exists alongside cosmopolitanism and limits its harmful expressions.
References
- Cornelissen, S., Cheru, F., & Shaw, T. M. (eds.). (2016). Africa and international relations in the 21st century. Basingstoke, United Kingdom: Palgrave Macmillan.
- Inukonda, S. (2019). Media, nationalism, and globalization: The Telangana movement and Indian politics. New York, NY: Routledge.
- Miller, M. L., & Ury, S. (eds.) (2016). Cosmopolitanism, nationalism and the Jews of East Central Europe. New York, NY: Routledge.
- Sadiq. K. (2017). Postcolonial citizenship. In A. Shachar, R. Baubock, I. Bloemraad, & M. Vink (Eds.), The Oxford Handbook of citizenship (pp. 178-199). Oxford, United Kingdom: Oxford University Press.
- Seth, S. (2019). Postcolonialism and the history of post-colonial nationalism. In S. Berger & E. Storm (Eds.), Writing the history of nationalism (pp. 171-190). London, United Kingdom: Bloomsbury Publishing.
- Spencer, R. (2017). Whose cosmopolitanism? Postcolonial criticism and the realities of neocolonial power. In N. G. Schiller & A. Irving (Eds.), Whose cosmopolitanism? Critical perspectives, relationalities and discontents (pp. 37-40). Oxford, United Kingdom: Berghahn Books.
- Katz, A. (2018). Postmodernism and the politics of ‘culture’. Abingdon-on-Thames, United Kingdom: Taylor & Francis.