Nationalism in a Globalized Era
Adlai Erwin
The 21st century has been one of mystique and wonders from innovations in technology, medicine, and travel. Not only has the West experienced such rapid growth, but all across the globe, people are experiencing better livelihoods from the vast access to resources for both leisure and sustenance. Throughout the 21st century, we have consistently heard about how the world has become “smaller” and more globalized. Globalization has affected our lives in many different areas. Whether it be the access to the increased global transference of goods, ease of communication from one corner of the globe to another, or going to a global college like Westminster, globalization is everywhere. However, an area affected by globalization but often overlooked is nationalism. Briefly stated, nationalism is the idea of taking pride in one’s country on the basis of historical and cultural ties to a specific nation, usually a person’s native country. Globalization has largely made the world less pluralistic, and the homogenization of the world community as a whole has had large effects on 21st-century nationalism.
The relationship between nationalism and globalization is important to analyze because of the varying opinions held in regards to what effect globalization has had on nationalism; moreover, it allows for easier analysis of common civic trends occurring due to the relationship between nationalism and globalization. In this paper, we will evaluate the histories of both globalization and nationalism, their convergence, and assess whether nationalism has been increased or decreased as a result of globalization. Once we have reached our consensus regarding the current state of nationalism, which in my opinion will show us that it has been increased by globalization, we will explore what effects 21st-century nationalism has had on immigration sentiments generally.
What are Nationalism and Globalization?
Nationalism, as defined by Merriam-Webster dictionary, is “loyalty and devotion to a nation; especially: a sense of national consciousness exalting one nation above all others and placing primary emphasis on promotion of its culture and interests as opposed to those of other nations or supranational groups” (Nationalism | Nationalism Definition). In other words, nationalism is the idea of identifying with a nation and subscribing to the notion that one’s nation and its culture are superior to others. It is important to note that nationalism is not solely identifying with a country and its culture. Rather, it is a largely a psychological phenomenon. More contemporarily, nationalism has become associated with idealized conceptions of how a nation should be, usually on the basis of how the nation operated in the past. However, more often than not, these idealized conceptions of past national greatness are largely imaginative and not necessarily based in reality. Typically, nationalism takes two forms: one of unification, and one of superiority. The latter one has become the current trend.
The term globalization has been assigned many different definitions and is used rather interchangeably based upon context. For this research, we will define globalization as “a process of interaction and integration among the people, companies, and governments of different nations. A process is driven by international trade and investment, and aided by information technology” (What is Globalization?). Globalization has been the common moniker of the 21st century, where we have seen much more interaction between people across the globe through avenues such as social media and international economic interdependence. Globalization has become everyday terminology in our contemporary milieus.
Histories of Nationalism and Globalization:
The idea of an abstract identification with a nation has been a mostly modern phenomenon. However, nationalism’s psychological roots can be theoretically traced back to the ancient Hebrews and Greeks, both of which had strong ties to a common culture and often viewed themselves as superior to rival groups; the Hebrews especially believed that they were the “chosen people” (The “Chosen” People). While communal consciousness has been a longtime trend, the idea of identifying with a solidified nation has not. Many scholars trace the origins of nationalism to 1648, the end of the 30 years’ war and the resulting Peace of Westphalia treaty. The Peace of Westphalia ushered in the idea of state sovereignty and forged the concept of nation-states as autonomous territorial entities (The Peace of Westphalia and Sovereignty). As a result, this began the process of nation-states coalescing socio-historical roots, allowing for people to more easily identify with their respective territories, which also was accompanied by historically common ethnic groups residing in the nation-state. All of these factors led to the birth of nationalism as we know it today.
It was not until the 19th and 20th centuries that we began to see nationalism more widespread. Nationalism in the 19th century helped to forge splintered nations like Italy and Germany, uniting them under the common identification of belonging to an overarching nation-state. Nationalism was used as a means of overcoming somewhat frivolous discrepancies between sub-sects within a state. Not only did nationalism unify nation-states, it also led to increased ethnic nationalism under supranational empires like the Ottomans and the Austrians. Nationalism in this regard was used as a medium to push back against overarching empires, allowing people to unite in calls for independence and increasing their claim’s legitimacy.
During the 20th century, nationalism began to stray from being a means of unification. It evolved into an idea of national superiority much like today’s nationalism. Aggressive nationalism rooted in superiority led to the outbreak of World War I and World War II, with both wars being predicated on notions of nationalistic superiority, and the idea of nations being scapegoated by others. This was especially evident in Germany (Nationalism: History). Nationalism has been a fairly modern trend that has been utilized for its practicality, but also for its dangerous supremacy complex.
Much like nationalism, the history of globalization has much older roots theoretically. It could be argued that globalization started with the first migration of people out of Africa hundreds of thousands of years ago. However, the scholarly consensus is widespread in regards to a single point of time when globalization started. Globalization in terms of shared cultures, the movement of peoples, and more overall large-scale multifaceted integratory patterns has been largely due to economics. Thus, much of the historical discourse regarding its history mostly is rooted in economic evolution, with the aforementioned sociological aspects of globalization following concomitantly.
Many scholars contend that globalization, as we know it today, began around the 1500s. This period began with increased maritime exploration by the West, and groundbreaking cultural innovations such as the Italian Renaissance, the Protestant Reformation, and the beginning of modern science as we know it today. The 1500s is often noted as the precursor of the modern era, and even those who lived during this time realized it as an important point in history, “like the thoughtful observers of the early Industrial Revolution, many contemporaries in Europeans in the 1500s sensed that their era was a turning point, citing the triumph over geographical barriers, the explosion of knowledge, and the influx of new wealth as evidence of the birth of the modern era” (Globalization in Historical Perspective). They were right. The 1500s was when we began to see the expansion of knowledge of the world as a whole and increased documentation of such. This was accompanied by the sharing of cultures and intellectual findings between the West and the East, allowing for more global consensus on various discourses, critiques of cultures, and questioning of customs. The 1500s is also cited by many as the beginning of modern global capitalism, with increases in maritime endeavors being complemented by increased international trade.
The most widely identified point in history for globalization is the industrial revolution. Increased industrialization within a free market saw a rapid boom in production rates and overall availability of products. Such vast production of goods saw the need for an increase in demand, which helped spur the globalization process It could be argued that “ the most prominent impetus of [the] globalization process is the capitalist world economy which was incited by the industrial revolution” (Industrial Revolution: Impetus Behind the Globalization Process). To increase their reach, Capitalists looked towards markets in other regions of the globe to sell their products. Considering many newly industrialized nations were colonialists, it was easy for them to market and sell their products in the colonies they ruled over. As a result, we began to see the diffusion of products globally and an increase in the norm of global capitalism.
Industrialization and the solidification of a global market started the increase of foreign investment by capital-rich countries into smaller poorer nations that were usually colonies of the country making the investment. This was especially evident in the early 20th century, which was accompanied by the migration between colonies and their parent countries. Migration patterns resulting from global capital investment required infrastructure to be created in territories and the host countries to support migration flows. This helped circulate wealth globally and gave more nations in the world overall prosperity. However, the end of World War One made globalized economics and migration patterns stagnate due to high tariffs and an increase in economic nationalism within nations. It would not be until the cessation of World War Two when we saw a rejuvenation of global capitalism and the concurrent sociological patterns that occurred alongside it.
The Convergence of Globalization and Nationalism:
The increased flow of capital, people, and customs due to globalization has placed the role of contemporary nationalism into question. Globalization and nationalism have had a largely contemporary rift due to the magnitude to which globalization has occurred in the 21st century. Such increased globalization has put into question what it means to be a citizen of a state, whether or not state’s still have distinctive cultures, and to what extent distinct national borders are still relevant. It begins to beg the question as to whether nationalism has increased or decreased due to modern globalization.
The Case for Diminished Nationalism from Globalization:
Globalization, as its been shown, has allowed for borders to be transcended and has arguably diminished the role of nationalism and national identity as a whole. As John Kusumi argues, “Globalization is the anti-thesis of nationalism as it suggests that there are no boundaries [and] just one globe” (Godfrey, 2008).
As a result of globalization and the increased flow of people into different countries, overall singularly identifiable cultural identities have been eroded. Now we have begun to see largely mixed cultures within countries allowing for more globalized sociocultural structures. From this, the former cultural plurality between differing states has largely diminished, resulting in the notion of a single global cultural community identified as a collection of various cultures amalgamating into a single world culture. Although the influx of people has eroded national culture, it has also enabled the flow of technology that has allowed people to explore other cultures: “The development and spread of information and communication technologies has been an important component of this growth [in homogenous global culture] — much of which has depended on the dramatic increase in the private ownership of communication hardware” (Held, 51). Unlike previous decades, people across the globe have the ability to be exposed to other cultures as a result of technology. Simply put, people from across the globe can directly export their respective cultures, allowing for others to analyze, and sometimes adopt their cultural practices throughout the world. Citizens are allowed to implement newly learned cultural practices into their everyday lives, which essentially corrodes their own ties to their national culture. As a result, the overall national culture undermines the nationalist ideology. In the 21st century, the cultural ties that allow for nationalism to occur have been arguably rendered obsolete.
Moreover, nationalism has further been depleted by the advent and increasing influence of supranational organizations in the international system. Organizations like the European Union (E.U) have allowed for people to identify as post-national citizens. The E.U. has increasingly promoted the idea of a homogenous Europe, and has led more and more people to begin identifying themselves as “European” rather than as citizens from their origin countries. Transforming ideas of citizenship and the lessened feeling of connection to one’s country decrease nationalism since people are now less likely to promote their culture, or nation as a whole, over others.
Economics, as a catalyst for globalization, undermines economic nationalism because of the increased interdependence shared between countries. Intertwinement of economics between countries leads to economic nationalism being a thing of the past: “economic nationalism today is widely seen as obsolete and in many cases only causes harm to the state that practices it” (Globalization and its Effects on Nationalism). For a state to shift from neo-liberal economic policy to nationalist economics would be suicide for the state itself. State’s economies have increasingly become dependent on others, especially on those to which they have strong economic ties to. This is exemplified by the 2008 recession that started in the U.S.. As a result of so many economies being linked to the U.S., much of the global economic system, specifically the West, was put into limbo.
Also, the introduction of Transnational Corporations and their influence within the global market has negatively affected nationalism. Increases in the imports and exports of goods from around the world, much like technology, allows for people to increasingly be exposed to other cultures. However, this perniciousness is subtler than some of the aforementioned notions: “Cooking with fruits and vegetables imported from nations at the other end of the world or playing games on electrical entertainment devices from Japan change a nation’s culture in the long term” (Globalization and its Effects on Nationalism). This is due to the long-term exposure associated with using products from other countries indicative of that country’s culture. There tends to become an increased normality in the use of products created outside of a person’s nation, making it seem more customary to use culture’s products rather than their own. As a result, people are less tied to different facets of their culture that play into a sense of nationalism.
The Case for Increased Nationalism from Globalization:
Many of the arguments regarding globalization having a negative impact on nationalism work dichotomously to prove nationalism has in fact been increased by globalization. Citizens have increasingly felt threatened by globalization. As a result, they have become increasingly nationalisticOften, it varies by each individual citizen as to what extent their nationalist attitudes have been impacted by globalization.
An increase in world cultural homogeneity has synchronously worked to both diminish nationalism and to increase it. Cultural ties to the nation-state have seen an upsurge under 21st-century globalization due to the threatening feeling brought about by cultural imperialism. Citizens have made it a point to preserve their cultural heritage and have an increasing backlash against multiculturalism within their states. Increasingly, appeals have been made to past cultural norms as a reaction to the perceived impact of cultural imperialism within nations. Multiculturalism has increasingly become perceived as a negative rather than a positive component in society. Cultural threat perceptions brought about by globalization have seemingly made people more adherent to stereotypes of their culture in hopes of preventing its decimation.
While globalization has increased economic interdependence and has seemingly decreased economic nationalism, this is not always the case. Across the West, we have begun to see criticisms from working-class individuals who feel as if they have been left behind by globalization. The increase of transnational corporations has led to the outsourcing of low-skilled manufacturing jobs that employed many people in the West. This sense of resentment is called the left behind thesis, which posits that globalization has raised prosperity across the world, with the exception of the working class in Western societies (When and Why Nationalism Beats Globalism). These individuals have increasingly lost their jobs and as a result, have begun to view economic globalization as something harmful rather than helpful. As a result, renewed economic nationalism has occurred mostly from people in the aforementioned socioeconomic category. For example, as we saw in the 2016 presidential election, much of the American electorate resents the fact that American jobs in the manufacturing sphere have been outsourced to people in under-developed countries: “the effects of the economic globalization and the relative decline of the American dominance in world trade and global economic production has left millions of American workers unemployed and feeling resentful of their economic conditions” (My Theory on the Trump’s Phenomenon. Why Donald Trump? And Why Now?). The overwhelming feeling in the U.S. of workers being “screwed” by globalized trade deals and the concurrent jeopardizing of American economic stature has reinvigorated economic nationalism within our own country.
Globalization has also put the nation-state itself under the microscope in terms of its effectiveness contemporarily. Globalization in the 21st century has been more all-encompassing than globalization in the past. Due to this, citizens of nation-states are increasingly feeling as if the distinctive natures of their states are being threatened by globalization, and even the instrumentality of the state itself within global politics: “there seems to be a growing incongruence between the contemporary features of world politics at the level of global society, and the anachronistic way in which politics is still structured and institutionalized through the persistence of the state system” (Regionalization, Globalization, and Nationalism: Convergent, Divergent, or Overlapping?). The idea of the nation-state itself being rendered obsolete in the context of global politics inevitably invokes nationalist sentiments as a protective mechanism against the dismantling of one’s nation.
The aforementioned invocation of nationalism is only exacerbated by the increased influence of supranational organizations like the E.U. and their effect on state sovereignty. Being a part of a supranational organization comes with the price of losing some sovereignty from being subjected to the will of an overarching body of governance. Feeling threatened by unwanted impositions brought about at the supranational level, nationalism increases more so once again as a protective mechanism in the sense of wanting to preserve Westphalian autonomy. We saw this type of nationalism in the recent Brexit referendum, which resulted largely due to fiscal burdens being placed on Britain in the form of taxation (A Question of Sovereignty: Tax and the Brexit Referendum). Nationalism is increased in this regard through appeals to the idea that the nation-state should have the final say in its affairs and should not be subjected to the authority of any outside governance who hopes to encroach upon its sovereignty. Citizens coalesce through nationalism in an effort to combat this type of international imperialism.
Discussion and Consensus:
Based on my research, it is evident that nationalism has increased, rather than decreased, due to globalization. While there is palpable evidence for the latter argument, it does not seem to mirror reality. More contemporary empirical evidence exists regarding nationalism increasing rather than decreasing. As we have seen throughout the West, the rise of right-wing extremism has largely been due to appeals to nationalism, the idea of the nation’s former greatness, and the need for cultural and economic restoration.
Increased Nationalism’s Effects on Immigration Sentiments:
Nationalism is entrenched in the idea of cultural unity and a shared heritage between citizens. Nationalists cherish the idea of an overarching culture that unifies citizens of the nation and they do not want this to be upset. Immigrants are seen as culturally pernicious and unable to assimilate. This view has resulted in negative outlooks towards the idea of liberalized immigration policies. Anti-immigration appeals to culture are emotionally based: “immigrants are by definition outsiders in contexts where national identity is the basis of self-categorization and emotional attachment” (European Opinion on Immigration: Role of identities, interests, and information). Immigrants are at an obvious disadvantage in terms of nationalist appeals. Since they are not natives, it is supposed that they are unable to feel the same sense of nationalist pride towards the nation they wish to immigrate to. Cultural appeals to oppose immigration are largely imaginative, especially considering in the modern era so much immigration has already occurred that the idea of one overarching national cultural identity is non-existent.
The 21st century has seen an unfortunate trend in religiously motivated attacks on Western societies by Middle-Eastern extremists. Nationalist opposition to immigration has been fostered by national security concerns. Contemporary anti-immigration rhetoric has largely been centered on the notion of terrorists entering the country through relaxed immigration laws. This is especially the case with the Syrian refugee crisis. Hundreds of thousands of people are left without the prospect of finding asylum in Western countries because of xenophobic stereotypes that they must be terrorists, or terrorist sympathizers. It has been shown that “strong national identity is associated with biased interethnic attitudes” (Psychological Essentialism and Nationalism as Determinants of Interethnic Bias). Thus, nationalist anti-immigration sentiments in the name of national security in regards to the Middle East are only exacerbated by perceived ethnocentric norms that constitute a person as “belonging” to a nation.
One of the largest correlations between nationalism and anti-immigration sentiment is economics. Since globalization has already taken so many jobs out of domestic economies, citizens respond with increased senses of economic nationalism because of the assumed scarcity of jobs already for native workers. The inflow of immigrants is associated with the idea that the already dwindling opportunity for jobs will only be made worse by the influx of immigrants. Nationalism makes it seem as if it is in one’s self-interest to oppose immigration since immigration is believed to have an acute effect on the lives of citizens in this instance. Jobs are not the only catalyst behind nationalism economically, as the perception of immigrants needing social services at the expense of citizen’s is also apparent. A popular outlook is that immigrants coming in will inevitably need social assistance, or will have access to these types of aid. Under this pretense, it is believed immigration is economically burdensome on the country as a whole and therefore should be opposed to preserving economic sincerity. This is especially prevalent in American nationalism, where the idea of individual prosperity is incongruent to state well-fare services, perpetuating the view of immigrants as being needy and unwilling to work.
Anti-immigration and nationalism have increased identity politics in many Western nations, especially the U.S., while concurrently turning the electorate against each other. In the U.S., many Republican, right-wing voters view immigration pejoratively and have thus made it into a partisan issue. It is seen as being “American” to oppose immigration under the idea of national preservation in terms of culture, economics, and demographics. As a result of this partisanship, voters are more likely to view their partisan counterparts as “un-American” and wanting to upset the social order within the state. Of course, this is a rather illogical view, but it continually propagates election cycle after election cycle.
Globalization and its relationship with nationalism are complex. It is likely the future will bring increased globalization with more innovations technologically, which will result in an even more intricate relationship between a citizen’s feeling of connection to their nation-state and the evolving global society around them. The nation-state will likely continue to be the main political entity in the international system, as it has been shown nationalism is already beginning to rise, and even more extreme feelings of nationalism will likely occur. If this is the case, as we have seen currently, immigration sentiments will continue to worsen as a result of this neo-nationalism. Nationalism and the psychological tie to the state, are human nature, coupling modern tribalism with concrete borders. However, we as a species must fight our instincts in this regard and learn to accept one another independent of abstract belongings to a certain territory.
Bibliography
The “Chosen People” (n.d.). Retrieved December 13, 2016, from http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/Judaism/chosen_people.html
Atess, D. (2008). Industrial Revolution: Impetus Behind the Globalization Process. Ankara: Celal Bayar Üniversitesi.
Bordo, M. D., Taylor, A. M., & Williamson, J. G. (2003). Globalization in historical perspective. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Campe, C. V. (2008, December 3). Globalisation and its Effects on Nationalism [PDF].
Dodo, M. K. (2016) My Theory on the Trump’s Phenomenon. Why Donald Trump? And Why Now?. Journal of Alternative Perspectives In The Social Sciences 7(4), 593–611
Godfrey, C. (2008). The struggle between nationalism and globalization Available at: http://www.newrightausnz.com/2008/08/27/the-struggle-between-nationalism-globalization-part-1-by-colin-godfrey/
Held, D. (2000). A globalizing world?: Culture, economics, politics. London: Routledge in association with the Open University.
Kacowicz, A. M. (1999). Regionalization, Globalization, and Nationalism: Convergent, Divergent, or Overlapping? Alternatives: Global, Local, Political, 24(4), 527–556. doi:10.1177/030437549902400405
Kendrick, M. (2016). A Question of Sovereignty: Tax and the Brexit Referendum. King’s Law Journal [serial online]. December 2016;27(3):366–374. Available From: Academic Search Complete, Ipswich, MA. Accessed December 13th, 2016
Nationalism | Nationalism Definition. (n.d.). Retrieved December 13, 2016, from https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/nationalism
Nationalism: History. (n.d.). Retrieved December 13, 2016, from http://www.infoplease.com/encyclopedia/history/nationalism-history.html
Sides, J., & Citrin, J. (2007). European Opinion About Immigration: The Role of Identities, Interests and Information. British Journal of Political Science, 37(03), 477. doi:10.1017/s0007123407000257
The Peace of Westphalia and Sovereignty. (n.d.). Retrieved December 13, 2016, from https://www.boundless.com/world-history/textbooks/boundless-world-history-i-ancient-civilizations-enlightenment-textbook/the-rise-of-nation-states-1052/nation-states-and-sovereignty-1053/the-peace-of-westphalia-and-sovereignty-1055-17653/
Tsukamoto, S., Enright, J., & Karasawa, M. (2013). Psyschological Essentialism and Nationalism as Determinants of Interethnic Bias. Journal Of Social Psychology, 153(5), 515–519. Doi:10.1080/00224545.2013.795926
What Is Globalization? (n.d.). Retrieved December 13, 2016, from http://www.globalization101.org/what-is-globalization/
When and Why Nationalism Beats Globalism. (2016). Retrieved December 13, 2016, from http://www.the-american-interest.com/2016/07/10/when-and-why-nationalism-beats-globalism/
