Sarah Smith Blog 8: Nationalistic Passion

In my first blog essay, I wrote about the role of sheer chance in the composition of a nation. I myself did not actively accomplish anything that allows me to participate in the United States of America. I did not “make the cut” or “get picked” based on some strength of my own. I was merely born here in the US, like so many others who were merely born in the US. And now, together, we comprise a community. Sheer chance.

Two months and seven blog essays later, I believe there is still truth to this. I also believe, though, that my sense of nation has grown more complex. While we were brought together by sheer chance (in most cases), we have expanded upon that sheer chance to foster a camaraderie that goes beyond fate. Shared experience has yielded shared sentiments. The person who cares about her nation, even just a little bit, also cares about her fellow countrymen. In Chapter 8 of Imagined Communities, Anderson addresses the role of love as a unifier in communities--in nations. And I want to mention that because that is something which was entirely absent in my first blog essay and my prior conception of nation. There is something about a nation that makes many people willing to die for that nation. They love it so much that they would die for it. Thus, there is a shift from sheer chance to great passion even unto death. A nation, then, is made of many people, united under a single flag or government by chance, but unified on a deeper level by their upholding of the nation’s ideals and their desire to protect those ideals at whatever cost.

I think immediately of Amigo. In the film, we observe several parties representing several nations, each of which believes in their cause and is willing to defend it. They protect their national ideals to the point of death. This is, for me, where I begin to get frustrated and ask questions. How can people on such different sides be so sure that their side is right enough to die for it? I am not a history or government or political science major, and I would imagine such majors discuss themes like this one in class and probably have more answers than I do. For me, it’s just a frustration. It’s just a question. But it really shows the power of nationhood, the passionate quest to defend the ideals of the place where you come from, of the notions of state that you were born into and indoctrinated with since birth. Of course, some of this is broad generalizations, but there’s truth to it. I guess my concluding question is regarding whether or not the good outweighs the bad. Is nation as a unifier truly good, or does it just lead to factions that end up sparring with each other? Can nationalism become blind faith in misunderstood ideals? Obviously, we look back now at imperialism and see that we erred in possessing regions and peoples who we thought inferior to ourselves--but it was motivated by nationalism.

How do we curb the tide of nationalism? How do we encourage pride in nation without letting it become blindly following an emblem to the point of recklessness? That’s my question. People brought together by chance and united by love: this is nation. But the next step, to not let passion cloud judgment as we honor our nations, is the national idealism that I believe we should strive for.