The classical political definition of nationalism is the simple belief that the nation is the natural and proper unit of government.

This is expressed in the statement of John Stuart Mill, "the boundaries of government should coincide in the main with those of nationality" (171).

It is energized by an emotional commitment of allegiance, loyalty and love toward the collective whole of all who share the same cultural unity. Artists have tried to capture the power of this myth over the souls of men.

Stalin's definition of the "characteristic features of a nation" is widely quoted:

"A nation is a historically constituted, stable community of people, formed on the basis of a common language, territory, economic life, and psychological make-up manifested in a common culture" (Marxism and the National Question, 1913: 307).

Each of these seven characteristics strengthens the meaning of a collectively held belief in a shared destiny, but we cannot define a nation based only on one characteristic, such as language.

For example, the Swiss have a strong sense of national identity in spite of using three languages: French, German and Italian.

Common religion (Catholicism) provides a strong sense of shared unity in countries such as Poland, Italy, Brazil and the Philippines. However, division between Catholics and Protestants in Northern Ireland does not inspire rival nationalisms in the rest of the mainland UK, and it has no influence in the US.

Some countries such as Germany use race, or blood descent, as the main criteria for citizenship. However, most modern nations are multiethnic.

Therefore, national identity rests on a shifting combination of factors.

It can only be defined subjectively by the members.

Therefore, Heywood concludes that " . . . nations are cultural entities, collections of people bound together by shared values and traditions, in particular a common language, religion and history, and usually occupying the same geographical area" (160).

Because the cultural unity of any nation does not rest on any objective basis,

" . . . the nation is a psycho-cultural entity, a group of people who regard themselves as a natural political community and are distinguished by shared loyalty or affection in the form of patriotism" (161).

Nationalism constitutes a claim for historical transcendence and moral superiority. It represents a moral claim that individuals cannot attain freedom and morality without the nation that provides values and beliefs.

Individuals cannot protect their freedom to express their language and culture without a state composed of similar people dedicated to that purpose.

Jean-Jacques Rousseau promoted the concept of "the general will," which requires a culturally unified people--citizens with rights and duties--dedicated to the collective interest of society.

His concept of popular sovereignty provided the philosophical foundation for nationalism.

Therefore, nationalism was originally a liberal idea that supported democracy. Liberal nationalism promoted the essential equality of all nations.

Following the French Revolution, the French gained power to mobilize people through this ideology of loyalty and identity.

The power of this patriotism rested on the ideal of "fraternity"--shared language--as much as on liberty and equality. This power led to the Revolutionary and Napoleonic Wars (1792-1815).

In Germany and Italy, resentment against France took the form of imitation. People concluded that the that they could not only throw off the French yoke, but also improve their welfare over the long run through the same ideology of nationalism.

Although a rising middle class provided the strongest center of support for nationalism, national unification resulted from the success of rising states such as Piedmont, rather than through a popular revolt.

Italy became a united state in 1861 and took control of Rome in 1870.

Conservatives adapted nationalism (as a form of elite manipulation) as a tool against social revolution and class solidarity.

They learned to appeal to people who feel that their national identity is in danger. They argued for the defence of traditional institutions to strengthen the social order. It often develops into the promotion of intolerance and bigotry.

We can identify at least four "waves" of nationalism--meaning times in which new states have come into existence claiming their legitimacy from representing a nation. American (1776) and French nationalism (1789) constitute the first wave, but this generally also includes the reactive nationalisms of Italian and German unification.

The second wave came after WW I when the empires defeated in war crumbled under the demands of nationalist movements in many Eastern European countries. The term, "self-determination" became famous as a liberal principle when Woodrow Wilson asserted it during the peace negotiations after the war.

The victorious powers (US, Great Britain, France) justified breaking up the Austro-Hungarian empires of Europe using this principle. Woodrow Wilson’s use of the term self-determination gave crucial external support and legitimation.

The third wave of nationalism came after WW II as both the occupied colonial powers of Belgium, Holland and France and the victorious British lost their colonies. Nationalist movements exploited the weakness of the imperial center to fight for and gain independence.

Imperialism itself was discredited during the war. In most colonies, nationalist movements struggled to build a common identity among disparate mixtures of people with little in common except their shared experience. As a result, sixty more states joined the international system.

The fourth wave of nationalism consists of the states that achieved independence after the breakup of the Soviet Union and Yugoslavia.

Anthony Smith emphasizes the claim that modern nations represent historical ethnic communities. The belief that national communities are ancient, and now demand their own state, is a theoretical perspective called primordialism. (Anthony Smith’s writings are actually more sophisticated than any simple primordialist viewpoint.)

The "myth" of nationhood is expressed in the "primordial" perspective that nations are characterized by common descent. This produces a concept of identity that is unchanging and unchangeable. Therefore, the primordial perspective supports the racialist arguments that exclude immigrants and anyone who does not conform to some specific norm.

The Marxist perspective, represented most famously by author Eric Hobsbawm, comes closest to the "rational-instrumental" perspective, which emphasizes that powerful groups

use nationalism as a tool to serve their interests in overcoming the threat of a social revolution. National loyalty helps bind the working class to the existing political structure.

In contrast, Ernest Gellner emphasizes that national identity developed out of specific circumstances--especially industrialization. He argues that social mobility and professional specialization lead to and require cultural standardization. He comes close to a fully "social constructivist" position that emphasizes the importance of processes of historical development.

Benedict Anderson more fully represents the constructivist approach when he argues that nations are only "imagined communities" constructed through mass media, education and political socialization.

Charles Tilly provides a perspective between the rational and the constructivist approach when he argues that "the State makes war and war makes the state."

In other words, the state comes first. Kings and successful warlords impose centralized education and use the symbols of military victory to create consciousness of shared identity among their subjects.
People adopt nationalism for purely rational reasons. When attacked by another group, people naturally seek collective resources to reject the enemy.

Nationalism will continue to exert political influence because: