ANDERSON’S ARTICLE ON NATIONALISM

1. THE THREE PARADOXES OF NATIONALISM.

The objective modernity of nations to the historian’s eye vs. their subjective antiquity in
the eyes of nationalist.
Anderson consents to a modernist interpretation of nationalism, when he affirms
that nations and nationalism are products of modernity and have been created for political
and economic points or justifications. This idea is opposed by a primordial interpretation,
which understands that nations and nationalism have existed from the beginning of
human history. This could also refer to how people believe that their nation is the most
superior. In order to define nations as imagined communities, it is important to
understand the last primordial interpretation of nationalism.
For Anderson, the subjective assertion in the antiquity of nations contradicts their
objective modernity in history, which justifies one of three paradoxes identified in the
discussion on nationalism.

The formal universality of nationality as a socio-cultural concept – in the modern

world everyone can, should, will ‘have’ a nationality, as he or she ‘has’ a gender vs.
the irremediable particularity of its concrete manifestation, such that, by definition,
‘Greek’ nationality, is sui generis.
Anderson defined nationality as "sui generis" or in short "unique". According to
him, it is inevitable for a person to have his/her own nationality. He even connects with
our modern world idea of combining our social and cultural factors that in our situation
today, everyone has the ability, to actually create his own unique national identity.
The ‘political’ power of nationalisms vs. their philosophical poverty and even
incoherence.

On the third part of Anderson’s paradoxes of nationalism, he differentiate the

thought of nationalism from political view to its philosophical view. Anderson tries to
explain that nationalism somehow are being seen through the power of politicians or
politics. It can be seen throughout their campaigns and with their devotion towards their
nation. Some politicians can even declared to risk their life for their country’s sovereignty
which is applicable here in our country. On the other hand, the philosophy of nationalism
itself was explained as the doctrine that one's national culture and interests are superior to
any other, it is more focused on its people, their ethnicity and the culture a nation has
which political view somehow contradicts. With this reason, we’re lacking the power to
understand nationalism in its theoretical meaning resulting for us to be inconsistent with
our decisions and belief in nationalism.
 2. NATION AS “IMAGINED COMMUNITIES”
Anderson portray the nation as a socially constructed community, imagined by the
people who perceive themselves as part of that group. It is “IMAGINED
COMMUNITIES” because even every member are not known, yet they identified as part
of the same nation. The members do not know personally to each other, however, in their
mind they seems to have the feeling of mutual connection.

3. THE CENTRAL PROBLEM OF THE ISSUE OF NATIONALISM.

The central problem of issue of nationalism is that there is so many concepts of
nationalism today. Different people depends on religion, language and experiences.

SUBMITTED BY: ILLUSTRADOS

ESMAQUIL, MELLY D.
MONREAL, LALAINE
ORDOÑEZ, ALLIAH
DALUMPINES, KATE ANNE
SIMOY, KLARIZE
SALINDATO, DOTHER
BSA 15