Three Authors that Criticize Nationalism

There are many theories and definitions of nationalism. “Imagined Communities: Reflections on the Origin and Spread of Nationalism” by Anderson Benedict gives a proper definition of nationalism. From the first chapter of the book, Anderson of the text believes that both Marxist and liberal lost substance in explaining the concept of nationalism. According to the author, nationality and nationalism are comparable to natural artifacts. In addition, nationalism is yet to produce heroes. The author argues that a nation only exists in people’s minds because its members do not truly know each other. The imagination exists in a nation’s community, sovereignty and boundaries. Similarly, nationalism is the process of imagining and creating an imagination of political community. The author uses cultural roots, origins of national consciousness, Creole pioneers and linguistics to show the existence of imagined communities.

Anderson Benedict attempts to revive the meaning of a nation by defining what makes a nation. This attempt is commendable especially in the modern world where everyone claims to be a nationalist. The resolve to conclude that a nation is an imagined community is both positive and negative. Firstly, the concept of an imagined community provokes peace and harmony in the world. However, deriving nationalism from an imagined community is not applicable in the modern world. This is because it may result in disorderliness as people struggle to find their own people. More importantly, Anderson Benedict’s arguments and justifications are too theoretical to be real. Throughout the book, the author relies on historical narrations and assertions to drive his point home. As a result, even a vivid reader loses relevancy of...

... middle of paper ...

...hor argues that historical comparative analysis is the best tool for explaining social revolutions.

Social revolutions remain a mystery to a majority of people around the world. The author clarifies this aspect and sheds light on an insight outlook at social revolutions. His arguments lay form a basis from a historical point of view. This is the problem with the book. The author fails in attempting to connect and explain historical events to the current trends. In such an attempt, the author forgets the drastic changes that continue to reveal in the modern world. As a result, the book loses relevance in discussion of the modern revolutions. It is for this reason that the book becomes important only as a historical piece of art. In addition, the author fails to gain concrete ground in offering alternatives to the existing theories on social revolutions.