Being a Minority is a Fate No One Wants, Can Nationalism Really Be

Inclusive?

Abrahim Shah

(3rd CSS 2018, PAS)

Key Takeaways

 Nationalism demonizes different communities because nation states need cultural and
ideological unity to achieve credibility
 Nationalism is therefore by nature exclusive and poses several challenges for minorities
 These challenges can be economic, political, social in nature and can also lead to racism
towards different communities
 The recent spurt of violent nationalism is a product of the severe inequality
neoliberalism unleashed on the world and of the 2008 economic crisis
 It is important to move towards inclusive states and to mitigate the plight of minorities
all over the world
 This can only happen through ending inequality, increasing cultural interaction and
developing strong educational, political and social exchange programs

Outline
Introduction

Nationalism is predicated on exclusion and marginalization of certain communities; minorities

do not have the same privilege or access to resources majority groups do; nationalism has once
again come to the fore because of the 2008 financial crisis; nationalism is inherently exclusive
and thus requires checks and balances to protect minorities

Defining nationalism

An intense sense of pride and superiority towards one’s own nation, ethnicity or community;
difference between nationalism and patriotism

Different types of minorities

 Ethnic communities
 Religious communities
 Racial communities
 Linguistic minorities
The exclusive nature of nationalism and why being a minority is a fate no one wants

 Racism
 Political and religious exclusion
 Limited access to jobs and economic resources
 Minorities are often victims of severe violence
 Bias in the judicial system

Examples of exclusive nationalism

 Donald Trump and the visible face of racism in the United States
 India and the oppression of Muslims
 The rise of the far right in Europe

Why is nationalism exclusive

 The nature of the nation state

 The need for a national identity and culture
 Capitalism, economic inequality and blaming the ‘other’

How to make nationalism more inclusive

 Finding a common solution to the world’s economic problems

 Strengthening the United Nations and global cooperation
 More cultural and political interaction

Conclusion

Nationalism is a sentiment that seeks to marginalize the ‘other’; capitalism and the economic
crises of 2008 led to the rise of nationalist parties in the West and in India; it is essential to find
economic and political ways to make nation-states more inclusive

The iconic Champs-Elysees in France and the historic India gate in New Delhi come alive
with the sounds of crowds cheering France and India’s demagogues—Marine Le Pen and
Narendra Modi respectively. Despite the stark contrast in their backgrounds, both Le Pen and
Modi champion an ideology that rests on excluding others and minorities from the collective
imagery of the French and Indian nations. Immigrants and people of color in France, Muslims in
India—both Modi and Le Pen make recourse to a virulent strand of political thought that rests
on a highly myopic vision of their countries. This political thought is nationalism, or the belief
that one’s own ethnicity, country or community is superior to all the rest. By its very nature,
therefore, nationalism is exclusive and rests on marginalizing those who do not align with the
majority’s vision of nationalism. Minorities thus, are under immense scrutiny and danger in
countries which are increasingly embracing nationalism. This new found sense of nationalism
stems from the economic crisis that gripped the world in 2008, and which pitted the economic
fortunes of the ‘natives’ of Western countries with foreign labor and immigrants. Nationalism
by its nature, therefore, is a product of various political and economic forces. Equitable and just
economic, social and political policies are thus essential to protect minorities and to ensure
balance in today’s states.

The essence of nationalism was best captured by former French President Charles De
Gaulle, who claimed,

“Patriotism is when love of your own people comes first; nationalism, when hate for
people other than your own comes first.”

-Charles De Gaulle (former president of France)

As De Gaulle highlights, nationalism is a sentiment which instills a fierce sense of loyalty

and sense of superiority towards one’s own form or structure of identity. Nationalism is also
predicated on hatred and opposition to the other and towards those who do not conform to
the same identity. This ‘other’ can be an ethnic minority, a racial minority, a religious minority
or even a linguistic minority—as the Bengalis were in Pakistan. Examples of ethnic minorities
include the Hazara community in Pakistan and the Uyghur community in China. African-
Americans and Native Americans are racial minorities in the United States, while Muslims are
religious minorities in India. It is, however, important to realize that intersectionalities exist
within minorities. The Hazara in Pakistan, for instance, are both ethnic minorities and religious
minorities since they hail from the Shiite sect in a predominantly Sunni majority country. The
Rohingya in Myanmar, similarly, are both religious and ethnic minorities.

This definition of nationalism and the various forms of minorities that exist in the world
are essential precursors to understanding why minorities have such terrible fates in different
countries. Minorities face challenges that are political and economic in nature, and in gaining
justice or equal opportunities. Minorities are also subject to racism and exclusion, and are often
victims of severe state and non-state violence.

The most stark problem minorities face and the one most evident is racism. This racism
is evident in public spaces, state policies, in the media and in personal interactions. Racism
against minorities often stems from certain established stereotypes or generalizations the
majority forms towards the minority. Jokes against the Pashtun community in Pakistan,
believing African-Americans are criminal in nature, and accusing South Asians of ‘smelling of
curry’ are thus all racist constructs which are products of misconceived notions. These racist
views, in turn, spillover into public dealings as well, with many Pakistanis wrongly labelling
Pasthuns as ‘dumb’, while many white Americans fear their black counterparts simply on
account of their skin color.

This racism thus forms the basis for political and religious exclusion in societies as well.
In politics, for instance, many people do not cast their votes for certain ethnicities or races
because these are considered mentally and emotionally ‘inferior’. This fallacious logic was in
fact the basis to not grant the right to vote to most Indians during the British raj in the Indian
Sub-continent. Most Indians, according to the British, were not considered mentally fit enough
to rule themselves. Minorities, therefore, are often excluded from the corridors of power and
from decision making, thus highlighting how racism taints politics as well.

Religious minorities are also often unable to openly practice their religion. This inability
once again stems from stereotypes surrounding different religious communities. A prime
example of this religious racism is the oppression Muslims face in the West. Forms of Muslim
identity—the burka and the minaret—have come to be associated with terrorism and
barbarianism, which has resulted in many Western countries banning this visible form of
religious identification. The inability to wear a burqa is a clear infringement of the rights of
Muslim women, and once again highlights how preconceived notions about a particular religion
or religious group translate into racist policies. Minorities, therefore, are subject to religious
prosecution as well which highlights why people do not prefer being minorities.

Marginalization in the economic domain is another fate that often awaits minorities in
many countries. Simply because of their religious, racial or ethnic affinity, many individuals are
denied employment or positions in different services. In fact, a survey conducted in certain
Western European countries revealed that a person with a Christian name had a thirty three
percent better chance to secure a job than a person with an ‘Islamic’ name.

This bias has racial undertones as well, with African Americans far less likely to secure
well-paying positions than their white counterparts in the United States. This exclusion then
translates into economic misery for minorities, with many minority communities forced to
accept low paying and tenuous positions. African American households in the United States, for
example, have median incomes only half that of white households.

Minorities are often also subject to severe forms of violence which puts the future of
entire communities at risk. This violence often takes on legal and structured forms such as the
Myanmar military’s genocide against the Rohingya and the violence Turkey has unleashed
against the Kurds of Iraq. It can also often take less structured forms of violence such as the
Israeli armed groups attacking Palestinians immediately after the British left in 1948, or the
genocide of the Tutsi by the Hutu community in Rwanda in 1994. Minority communities thus
often face existential risks in many countries.

This violence is again a product of racist stereotypes which stem from historical and
political views. Muslims in India, for example, are subject to increasing degrees of violence
simply because of how neoliberalism and Hindu chauvinism have taken hold of Indian politics.
The marginalization of Indian Muslims, therefore, is political in nature and is a product of the
political and economic events that have shaped India over the last three decades. The dangers
of nationalism were in fact best captured by the brilliant Noam Chomsky, who argued,

“Nationalism has a way of oppressing others.”

-Noam Chomksy (academic and author)

Nationalism therefore acts in various ways to isolate and ostracize minorities and the
‘other’. There are in fact several examples in today’s world which highlight how exclusive
nationalism is and the impact this has on minorities. The foremost example is the rise of Donald
Trump in the United States. Donald Trump won the 2016 American presidential election on a
platform which openly advocated white supremacy and labelled Latin Americans as ‘murderers’
and ‘rapists’, and Muslims as ‘terrorists’. Trump’s form of nationalism, therefore, rested on
championing his race and religion over all others, and excluding other identities from the
American nation.

The rise of the far-right in Europe is another phenomenon very similar to the rise of the
Donald Trump, and which further highlights how exclusive nationalism threatens minorities.
The National Front in France, the Five Star party in Italy, the Alternative for Germany in
Germany and the Freedom Party in Austria are all political parties which came into the
mainstream on the back of highly nationalist and racist campaigns. These parties called for
removing immigrants and especially Muslims from Europe, and openly advocated for a Europe
comprising solely of the province’s white population. The far right in Europe, therefore, is
another representation of the virulent nationalism that has gripped Europe.
 India too is a country which is currently grappling with a particularly severe form of
nationalism. The current Prime Minister of India, Narendra Modi in fact embodies this Hindu
nationalism in India. He has never refuted or denied his role in the 2002 Gujarat riots which
killed more than a thousand Muslims, and he also chose to turn a blind eye towards the hatred
Hindus are unleashing towards Indian Muslims. Narendra Modi, Donald Trump and the far right
in Europe’s nationalism are best captured by the quote,

“Nationalism is a tool increasingly used by leaders to bolster their authority, especially

amid difficult economic and political conditions.”

-Richard Haass (former official of the United States Department of State)

The rise of demagogues such as Narendra Modi and Donald Trump, and the violent
nationalism they espouse thus begs the question why nationalism is always exclusive and how
these racist forces came to dominate the world over. One line of argument claims that nation
states by themselves are exclusive and thus rest on creating artificial divisions between
communities. The brilliant academic and author of Imagined Communities, Benedict Anderson
was one of the earliest proponents of this argument and in fact, claimed,

“The nation is imagined as a community, because, regardless of the actual inequality

and exploitation that may prevail in each, the nation is conceived as a deep, horizontal
comradeship.”

-Benedict Anderson (author of Imagined Communities)

Anderson here perfectly captures the tensions that exist in a nation-state and how these
tensions often lead members of a nation to demonize others. This demonization is necessary to
shore up support amongst nationals and to unite them against a common cause. For Anderson,
therefore, the nation state—and by extension nationalism—is inherently exclusive and thus a
threat to minorities.
 The structure and shape many nation-states take often also leads to exclusive
nationalism and to the marginalization of minorities. This stems from the unique circumstances
these nations are born in, and the impact that has on minority communities. Nation-states born
in challenging circumstances are often forced to make recourse to unique cultural traits and
ideas to shore up their credibility. The prime example of this is our own country, Pakistan,
which relied on Islam and Urdu as the national language to cement its existence. This recourse
to a particular religion or ideology often excludes those who do not associate with the state-
ordained religion or ideology—thus giving birth to exclusive nationalism.

Modern exclusive nationalism—epitomized as it is by Trump and Modi—has a more

economic origin however. This origin lies in the 2008 financial crisis and the largest ills that
plague neoliberalism and capitalism. Both Modi and Trump, in fact, came to power after
massive inequality emerged in their respective countries. This inequality was down to the
unfettered capitalism and the faulty policies that led to the 2008 financial crisis and the massive
unemployment that triggered. Economics, therefore, played a fundamental part in
perpetuating nationalism in the United States, India and Europe, since locals held foreign
workers responsible for their economic woes. This alienation and hatred is what leaders like
Trump and Marine Le Pen cashed in on. The Indian author, Pankaj Mishra captured this line of
argument best when he said,

“It turns out that globalization, while promising sameness through brand-name
consumption, was fostering, through uneven economic growth, an intense feeling of difference.”

-Pankaj Mishra (author of The Age of Anger)

Nationalism thus has historic political and economic antecedents which make it
exclusive in nature. Identifying these causes naturally leads to a conversation on how to
ameliorate this immense sense of exclusion and isolation, and on how to make nation states
more inclusive. The first step to make nationalism more inclusive is to target the economic
causes of xenophobia and hate for the other. This requires imposing an economic model that
does not rest on strenuous competition or individualism.

The best example of this model is the welfare system Scandinavian countries
implemented. Such a model envisages strong social security mechanisms such as free
education, free healthcare and cheap housing. All three of these are essential needs for people,
and when communities fail to gain access to them, they revolt and turn bitter. In today’s
globalized world, this bitterness becomes targeted towards foreign workers and immigrants
thus leading to exclusive and vengeful nationalism.

Another step states must take is to ameliorate inequality within their borders. Economic
inequality brings to the limelight the differences which exist amongst communities and thus
further perpetuates a malicious form of nationalism. In the United States for example, rural
white Americans do not have the same incomes as South Asian Americans do. This naturally
leads to hatred towards the South Asian community among white Americans, who feel entitled
to the resources America produces. Inequality and economic uncertainty, therefore, must end
to remove xenophobia and hateful nationalism.

Moving towards inclusive nationalism also requires cultural interactions and exposure
on a societal and educational level. This will expose individuals to different perspectives and
thus ameliorate the misunderstandings people hold towards one another. Different religions,
cultures, societies and states must therefore come together to engage on different platforms
and to spread awareness amongst their communities. The best way to do this is through
empowering the United Nations and enhancing education exchange programs. The United
Nations can develop programs that lead to collaboration in fields such as healthcare, science
and cultural exposure, while education institutions can initiate programs that allow students
from all over the world to interact with one another. The importance of cultural interaction in
ending hate and xenophobia is best captured by the famous psychotherapist Nathaniel
Branden, who said,

“The first step toward change is awareness. The second step is acceptance.”

-Nathaniel Branden (psychotherapist and author)

In conclusion then, nationalism is a sentiment that rests on demonizing the ‘other’ and
is thus by nature exclusive. The exclusive nature of nationalism is in turn a product of the
unique characteristics of modern nation states, which rely on singular cultures and identities to
cement their presence. This attempt to narrowly define the nation state, coupled with the
economic crisis that gripped the world after the 2008 global recession means virulent and
exclusive nationalism is at its peak all over the world. Exclusive nationalism also has a significant
toll on all forms of minority groups, which are forced to either align with the majority’s
ideological inclinations, or be marginalized. This marginalization can take the form of direct or
indirect violence, religious prosecution, political alienation or racism in the public domain.
Minorities, therefore, have very challenging fates in nationalist states which necessitate the
need to take steps that improve the plight of minorities and mitigate this extreme sense of
nationalism. This can only happen if states identify the economic causes behind the recent
spurt of violent nationalism, and take rectifying measures that end inequality and reduce
poverty. At the same time, the global community must launch collaboration programs in fields
such as science, healthcare, cultural interactions; while educational institutions must move
towards a paradigm where students from all over the world can interact and learn one
another’s perspective. As Modi races towards re-election in India, and the left in America fails
to provide a sound alternative to the xenophobia of Donald Trump, these policies become
essential. Or else the world will continue to remain in the throes of exclusive nationalism.

Suggested Readings

Benedict Anderson, Imagined Communities

Pankaj Mishra, Age of Anger