Nationalism is not something learned. Pledging allegiance to a piece of fabric cannot possibly create nationalism, nor can being encouraged to "take a more active role in civil service" (Western Civilizations, Coffin & Stacey, 746). Nationalism, instead, comes from the people.
In the case of Prussia in the early 19th century, with reforms aiming to "revive 'patriotism and national honor and independence,'" the interference of the government in the domain of the citizen did not bode well. Encouraging nationalism in your country's people does not automatically boost the popularity of a regime. In fact, this is exemplified in the 1840's when Prussians rose up against the government, criticizing the lack of political freedom.
Similarly, Tsar Nicholas attempted to manipulate nationalism to curry favor among the people. This, however, had a definite downside, as it meant alienating the people who were not pro-Slav. Nationalism is only a stage on which other issues come to play. Yes there were empires, but within these empires existed minorities (the book would like you to read "liabilities to autocratic control"). In this sense, ruling a country could not be taken as a cookie-cutter process. All citizens were not the same, nor had the same wants. Even beyond the racial/ethnic divisions, there were also political divisions, complete with subgroups.
Popular rebellion is difficult to control, but often can be effective should the rebels pull their act together in a cohesive argument. In the case of Frederick William in 1848, the strength of the Prussian revolutionaries bullied the king into capitulating
And with popular rebellion often comes a sense of nationalism ("the sense of belonging to a community that shares historical, geographic, cultural, or political traditions" [Ibid.,745]). When fighting for a common goal (should the goal indeed be common, at least in the greatest sense), a certain camaraderie arises among the individuals. However, even this can be held back by the aforementioned divisions, be them political or ethnic.
What rebels need to be successful is a clear focus, a singular thing around which to orient their fight, and an integral part in determining this goal. For Hungarians, this was Lajos Kossuth, who played an integral part in strengthening the popular rebellion by adding the forces of some lower aristocracy.
January 21, 2009
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I might be misunderstanding your post, but you seem to change direction after your first paragraph. I agree with what seems to be the point of all your evidence: Leaders cannot control nationalism, and it often backfires by pulling apart a state that consists of multiple cultural identities that would like to form their own nation. However, I do not believe that nationalism necessarily "comes from the people." If anything, many of your examples show that nationalism can be fostered and encouraged by a leader or government.
ReplyDelete