AMERICAN HISTORY

AMERICAN HISTORY

Abstract

The relationship between individual and the state is of crucial importance in any civilized society. An Individual is a basic unit of any society who reflects about its characteristics and behavior. In this paper deviating from the conventional point of views, a new direction on the role of individual and the state nationalism has been provided. All the aspects that are related to the theme will be discussed with critical analysis and a conclusion will be drawn at the end.

Introduction

The relationship between an individual and the state has always remained a debating topic since the arrival of the concept of civilization thousands of years ago, but the definition and summary of the kept changing themselves according to variations in the concepts and level of maturity of the human race. The subject that is discussed here is modern in a sense that the latest aspects are going to be analyzed in it.

The definition of word 'modern' here is something that is not new or recently developed or invented. It means the development and up gradation of the old concepts with new ones that are according to the needs and requirements of the society.

In this paper, the outdated view that the nationalism initiates from cultural identity is denied. Instead, it is depicted that how social groups, foreign states and elite class use nationalist appeals to use the individuals in support of their cause against the government. Hence, nationalism can be defined as just a sense of creating identification and not the identification itself (BREUILLY J., 2006, How modern are nations and nationalism, PP.1-3).

Discussion

Till 1918, the subject of nationalism was linked with the establishment of nation, states and a profession of history. It was considered as a component of national history instead of a unique subject of study. The history taught in academics was based on national interests. The subject was not based on theory at all and everything was based on ethnicity and philosophy instead of analysis or sociology. Nationality was supposed to be a given it did not matter whether it is for good or even bad. It seems as it was for the good in the sense of making of constitutional federated states.

The most long lasting definitions of nationalism that came from the dominant philosophers of that era were based on the facts that society and states could not merged as a single entity. They considered that domestic conflicts may arise as a threat to the social politics. On the other hand, the traditional philosophers considered the nationalism as a fake or illusory consciousness as an ideology. Many of them also thought that it is something based on truth and reality and can be associated with linguistics basis.

The core difference between conventional and modern philosophy of nationalism is that some regard it as an imaginary idea raising differences while some think it as an opinion based on genuine issues (Gellner E., Breuilly J., 2008, Nations and Nationalism, Second Edition).

In broader point of view, a state is something bigger than ...