Like most American kids, I was taught from a young age that we live in a great, powerful, advanced country with a government and society based on freedom and equality. Ever since I can remember the patriotic messages have been instilled in my brain. We were taught to be proud of where we lived and to consider ourselves lucky. Some people say that America is the best country in the world.
And I'll admit, sometimes I've subscribed to that.. sentiment. It feels good to be a part of something big and important. It's comforting to know that you have something in common with every single person living on the southern half of North America. I've never been a politics guy but I've always loved my country and what it stands for. And after all, what would the Olympics be without national pride?
So, when we started discussing nation-building, the assumption that I had been making was that 'the nation' was a good thing. Like Sarmiento, I would have looked at Argentina and said, "alright guys, it's time we get our shit together. Look at this picture I drew of Paris. LOOK AT IT! They have shops, and roads, and government, and art, and music, and romance! And what do we have? A bunch of dudes riding horses!"
At first, nation-building sounds like a great improvement.
But when i really thought about the "criteria" for becoming a nation, and considered some of the less-obvious consequences, my whole mindset was completely turned upside down. I began to question everything I had previously thought about being a nation. Let me show you what I mean.
According to Burn's 'criteria' this is the best example of the ideal nation:
Think about it. Nazi Germany had impressive military power (to defend their borders, of course). They also had an unprecedented sense of national culture.
At first, people saw Nazi Germany and said, wow, what a nation! What a nation, indeed. Millions were slaughtered because of that nation. World wars were started because of that nation. And for what?
Now, I know that Nazi Germany is an unfair example. Most nations aren't like Nazi Germany.
But I guess my point is that, under the surface, the nation really isn't all that it's cracked up to be. I had been making the assumption that 'becoming a nation' was the right answer, the only answer. Now, I'm not so sure.
Sarmiento, even with all of his criticism of their lifestyle, recognized that the gauchos were happy. They liked their style of living. They liked to play rough.
Perhaps Argentina never should have became a nation. Maybe we shouldn't have any nations at all. Maybe those guys who were a bit 'rough around the edges' and full of pride should have been left alone to tend to their cattle. It's a lot better to have a crazy man leading a herd of cows than to have him lead people.
That is all for now. Good night, and good luck. You stay classy, Honors 280.
Lucas this is a very interesting idea! I too had never considered the idea that a nation may not be a good thing. How many wordily conflicts would be avoided if there were not nations? So many conflicts are a result of disputed borders or who is to control certain resources. How many lives would have been saved if we as "civilized" people were not so focused on the nation and the advancement of that nation? In high school we talked a lot about imperialism and the destructive force that it was, how would nations like the Philippines be different if imperialism never occurred? I think that the world would be a much more diverse place. A tad less organized too, but still. Maybe the world would be a happier place if everyone was left alone to do as they pleased in their own societies and were not so focused on becoming a nation.
ReplyDeleteA very insightful and thought-provoking exchange. I believe that true thinking only takes place once we begin to question our own assumptions. And this is exactly what you are doing.
ReplyDelete