There is a debate amongst academics as to the meaning of nationalism and its evolution in our societies. Nations have been evolving for many years, for centuries in fact, and if one looks at the literature at the time of the Revolution, the Federalists as well as Thomas Paine amongst many, one sees a clear trend to create a nation, a separate and distinct nation, which culminated in the Constitution. It had become clear in short order that the Confederation, a loose "fishing, drinking and smoking" club was not sustainable. Thus in just a few years a true nation evolved, with limited philosophers to drive it, just the men who created its underlying law, the Constitution.
"I have sometimes thought how high Ireland would stand in the world of letters if all her literary sons had stayed on her soil; Swift, Burke, Goldsmith, Wilde, Shaw, Joyce…The land was fertile, the moist cold air put blushing roses in the cheeks of the girls, and lust sons were eager to plant new life in willing wombs. But the spiritual atmosphere was deadly: a government Irish in name but foreign in humiliating fact; an Anglican Church more intolerant in Ireland than in England; a Catholic Church that loyal Irishman could not criticize or reform since she had suffered in fighting for Irish liberty. And just across the water was a Britain with a larger and more literate public, a freer press, a taste for Irish eloquence and wit. So Erin's genius crossed the Irish ea, and left a lovely island to destitute peasants and Joyce's Dubliners."
In a recent book by a Northern Irish academic, McGarry ( in his book The Rising ), he states:
"Where does the history of the struggle for Irish independence begin? For traditional republicans, like nineteenth century revolutionary John O'Leary, the story of Irish freedom stretches back over eight hundred years to Strongbow's invasion of Ireland in 1169; "If the English had not come to Ireland, and if they had not stayed there and done all the evil so many of them now allow they have been doing all along, then there would be no Fenianism." Although the English Crown's formal authority within Ireland can be dated to Henry II's expedition in 1171-1172…few historians would take such claims seriously, both because the Anglo-Norman invasion formed part of a much larger and more complex history of mutual interactions and colonization between hybrid peoples of the two islands, and continental Europe…..For many nationalists, the formative era in the struggle for Irish freedom was the sixteenth and seventeenth century period of Reformation…."
McGarry denies the nationalism which was part of Ireland, denies that it ever existed until the 19th century when the nationalists, by definition those seeking separatism, were brought to the fore. McGarry in good northern Irish form beknghts the good English caretakers and implies that the struggle was at worst a religious struggle, and that nationalism did not arise until much later.
I would strongly disagree for Ireland was a nation as early as the late sixth century. The writing of Columbanus to Gregory I clearly demonstrate that the Irish saw themselves as a cohesive group, separate from the Gauls and Merovingians and the Angles and Saxons. It was in fact the choice that Gregory made in sending Augustine as Bishop of Canterbury in 598 that started the split between Ireland and Britain. Gregory was battling with Columbanus since Columbanus and the Irish hierarchy has favored Greek church rules and regulations and Gregory was commencing the separation of the Bishop of Rome from Byzantium, he was not yet a Pope, still just the Bishop of Rome.
Thus one can argue that a true Irish nationalism was in place in 600 AD. What basis can one use for that statement, I will use Stalin's words from his study on nationalism, a study which he subsequently put into action when he established the USSR.
As Joseph Stalin wrote:
"What is a nation? A nation is primarily a community, a definite community or people…Thus a nation is not a racial or tribal, but a historically constituted community or people…a common language is one of the characteristic features of a nation…a common territory is one of the characteristic features of a nation…a common economic life, economic cohesion, is one of the characteristic features of a nation…a common psychological makeup which manifests itself in a common culture is one of the characteristic features of a nation…a nation is a historically constituted community of people formed on the basis of a common language territory economic life and psychological makeup manifested in a common culture."
This Ireland satisfied all of Stalin's demands as of 600, a common language, actually two, Irish and Latin, used intermingled, common land, the Island, common psychological makeup, common economic life. Thus one can argue Ireland was indeed a nation.
But to the present, the US is one nation, we struggled through the darkest hours defining that during the Civil War. Yet we are again facing a similar struggle, one where we on the one hand have the political divergence between progressives and constitutionalists, those who believe we can change anything we want whenever we so desire if it is in the best interests of the "people" versus the group who believes there is something sacred in the documents and philosophy upon which the country was founded. Secondly we have the change which could occur as we introduce new immigrants who may not have accepted the "rules" of the game and vary from "common language territory economic life and psychological makeup manifested in a common culture".
This will be the double challenge we will face as a country over the next decades. A good leader or set of leaders can make this a smooth transition, a less than good set of leaders can turn it into chaos. I default to what happened in Ireland.
Posts
