Topic:Is Nationalism an Asset Or Hindrance in Today S Globalised World?

TOPIC:IS NATIONALISM AN ASSET OR HINDRANCE IN TODAY’S GLOBALISED WORLD?

The world has become a global village, no doubt about that. In a world where technology makes it possible and so fast that it is almost impossible to believe to pass information, exchange goods and services, make friends and even marry, to deny the reality of globalization would amount to behaving like the proverbial fowl who seeing trouble coming chose to bury her head in the sand believing that hence she does not see the harbinger, all is well.

To properly appraise the place or impact of nationalization on the trend of globalization in today’s world, it is necessary to take a keen look at both concepts.

According to Dr. Gamer, “it is one of the characteristic features of most nationals that most people who constitute a nationality aspire to be independent and to be under a state organization or at least be accorded a large political autonomy where they are united with another nationality or nationalities in the same state”

We can therefore define nationalism as an idea; a concept; an awareness which feels a man with thoughts and sentiments which eventually redefines his existence and drives him to translate his awareness into conscious and organized actions which are aimed at protecting and preserving this national entity to which he thinks he belongs. That is why nationalism is also seen as patriotism. Nationalism births patriotism which is a necessary condition for freedom from foreign rule, i.e. colonialism. I would like to point out here that without elements of nationalism, globalization is apt to become neo-colonialism.

Having done with trying to define nationalism, it is imperative to also take a good look at what globalization connotes. Globalization refers to a process by which the world is becoming increasingly inter-connected as a result of massive increase in trade and cultural connection. We can also define globalization as the process of international integration arising from interchange of world views, products, ideas and various aspects of culture. Internationalization of production, great increase in mobility of capital and multinational corporations are all evidences of growing trends of Globalization.

According to Mittelman, 1996b, globalization signifies the deepening and intensification of economic interdependence. It includes spatial re-organization of production, interpenetration of industries across borders, the spread of financial markets, diffusion of identical consumer goods across distant frontiers and massive transfer of population . This means that globalization implies ideological and economic changes such as trade liberalization, deregulation, privatization and much more. Globalization also leads to technological revolution with all its social implications. I personally believe that it is in the light of the postulations above that nationalization comes in not as a hindrance but as a modulating force to moderate the excesses and negative impacts of globalization.

Historically, political fragmentation, often manifested by the quest for national self- determination and the creation of newer states has been a trend with as much significance as the forces of economic globalization (Holst 1996, 21-22)

First and foremost, it is usually postulated that globalization will lead to economic liberalization and this will eventually result in political democracy. Particularly as economic liberation provides subsequent democratic consolidation with material bases (Li, 1992,2).

But as Mittelbag, 1996a, argues, the economic edge of globalization makes it look antidemocratic. ‘This is particularly true as globalization lacks accountability. By condensing time and space of social relations, economic globalization transcends territorial states and is not accountable to elected political officials. The only form of accountability here is the interplay of the market forces of demand and supply and the Darwinist theory of the survival of the fittest which is very much undemocratic. The accountability needed to check the anti-democratic tendencies of globalization can only be found in strong, vibrant but pure and neutral nationalist tendencies of the human society.

Why do I have to qualify nationalism so strongly? The fear that nationalism may pose a threat to the process of globalization may be justified when nationalism becomes aggressive, militant and intolerant of international cooperation. Nationalism in its aggressive form may lead to racism. A good case study is that of Germany’s Hitler. It encourages colonialism and imperialism. Militant nationalism gets in the way of peace and cooperation

If nationalism only connotes pure patriotism uncoated by superiority complex and a selfish craving to dominate other national entities, it will be an asset, not a threat to globalization. Only when nationalism takes on a militant garb and thrives on aggression does it become a curse as it will breed mutual enmity and attendant conflict and unrest.

Although nationalism is sometimes twisted and perverted by despots, without nationalistic beliefs, nations are prone to become rudderless and unprotected and this is not conducive for true globalization to thrive.

Nationalism can be corrupted as it can take on the garb of pervert tendencies in the heart of a political leader but then, imperialism, not nationalism causes cold wars. Nationalism is a uniting force.

Nationalism in its pure form is a way of thinking that says that every ethnic group of humans should be free to rule itself. It recognizes the birthright of every set of people living in a particular geographical location to have independent existence. According to Burn, ‘there is some special quality in every group of humans which must be preserved in the interest of whole humanity.’ Nationalism offers an opportunity to every set of people to contribute their distinctive share to world civilization, economy and literature. It creates the spirit of healthy rivalry which results in growth of culture, technology and better standard of living.

Someone once said that the destruction of individuality is the destruction of genius. A writer has also argued and I completely agree with him that true globalization lies not in having all groups of men alike under the control of a common government but in realizing our peculiarities as different peoples and in spite of these differing peculiarities being able to benefit from one another’s strengths, accommodate our weaknesses and having a resolve to contribute jointly to the common good of man.

As beneficial as globalization is, it tends to do more harm than good when it encourages cultural imperialism such that advanced countries use the façade of globalization to coerce less developed countries to follow ideas or buy products which are alien to their culture and so destroy the cultural heritage of such societies. There is a problem posed when the people so concerned confuse adoption of wrong lifestyles, moral and social apathy with globalization. It is at this junction that nationalistic sentiments come to the rescue.

It is possible to see nationalism as opposing globalization. However, both forces can be complementary rather than contradictory. Just like the forces of demand and supply that tend to move in opposite direction in terms of their relationship with price and yet work together to maintain a measure of stability in the economy, both nationalism and globalization can cooperate even though they may not be harmonious.

One can also look at the relationship between nationalism and globalization from a positive perspective that depicts both forces as interphasing or overlapping rather than antagonistic towards each other. In this case, one precedes or leads to the other and both enhance or reinforce each other. There can be a mutually beneficial existence of these two trends.

Whether consciously or unconsciously, people will always maintain their group identity even when the political identity of such a group is disintegrating or has collapsed. The is because nationalism has roots that are deeper than political or economic considerations. It goes deep down to the emotional and psychological being of a man. It denotes a search; a conscious and inborn hunger for preservation of culture and identity. Therefore, to choose to see nationalism as a hindrance to globalization will always have a boomerang effect. (Eric Banner, 2001).

True nationalism is a link between different countries of the world. It should not be seen as a threat to globalization but rather as a force promoting it considering the fact those nationalist tendencies in humans tends to make them positively internationally aware and proactive. Sri Jawaharlal Nehru was a nationalist. But he was also an internationalist because as a result of his influence, the year 1965 was declared year of international cooperation.

Mahatma Ghandi of India was a nationalist to the core. However, one can deduce from his speeches and actions that he was not opposed to globalization. In fact, he sought to free India from the imperial control of Great Britain and position her has a globally competitive entity. He fought imperialism not globalization. The same can be said of the likes of Martin Luther Junior who led a movement against racism, Nelson Mandela of South Africa and Pa Obafemi Awolowo of Nigeria.

It is when insecure personalities with unbalanced philosophy hijack nationalism and turn it to a superiority complex which they sell to their followers that we can begin to look at nationalism as not just a hindrance but a threat to globalization.