Imagined Communities: Benedict Anderson’s Exploration into Nationalism’s Origins
Why is it helpful for us to understand the origin and spread of nationalism, I wondered. In Imagined Communities: Reflections on the Origin and Spread of Nationalism, Benedict Anderson does an excellent job of presenting his theory on the rise of nationalism, and his pivotal work is essential for any discussion of nationalism. While we might think of a ‘nation’ as ancient (think “Hellenistic Greece”), ‘nations’ as we know them have only been around for a few centuries. Identity and belonging shifted as the world moved into the modern age. 
Printing presses and rapid mass communication homogenized fluid languages; printed languages transitioned from the sacred to the vernacular; the emergence of the novel offered an external view of time. Exploration, colonialism, and resettlement (sometimes forced) led to foreign born Europeans (creoles) creating their own identities apart from their European “homelands.” The functionary roles of bourgeoisie leaders challenged both the hereditary leadership and divine blessing of feudalism. Maps became popular and cemented formerly porous boundaries (sometime arbitrarily). Industrialization created “human interchangeability.”[1] All of these factors converged to form what Anderson describes as an imagined political community… both inherently limited and sovereign.[2]
To ask again, why is it helpful for us today (as doctor of ministry students, people of faith seeking to enhance our leadership skills) to understand the origin and spread of nationalism? According to anthropologist Thomas Hylland Eriksen, one reason is that nationalism inherently must draw boundaries between insiders and outsiders, Us and Them. That is, group identities must always be defined in relation to what they are not.[3] Eriksen suggests that the drive to homogenization creates stigmatized others; there is no inclusion without exclusion.[4] When I am identified as an American (a term co-opted early on by the United States rather than the rest of the American nation-states), I am just as much suggesting I am not British, Swedish, or Kenyan (although my ancestors were both British and Swedish, and I was for a time a Kenyan resident). One challenge we see today with national identities is their fluidity. While migration has been around as long as humans have (and even before), immigration has exploded as the world population has. With solid boundaries, nation-states seek to create bounded national identities (“I am an American”). What happens, though, is that people—through cultural practices, language, skin color, religion, etc.—continue to identify themselves (and be identified by the state) as Other or Both/And (“hypens”). So in the United States, we see people being identified as Mexican-American, Korean-American, Muslim American, etc. For one reason or another (sometimes their own choosing, sometimes external factors), they have not assimilated, and their relationship to the state might be in flux (“build that wall!”, internment camps, Jim Crow laws, etc.). We see similar challenges to nationalistic identity throughout the world. For instance, Germany and much of Europe struggle with the immigration of Syrians out of Syria. Much of Europe grapples with the assimilation of Muslim Europeans. Kenyans wrestle with the Somalian immigrant population in their borders. What does it mean to be American? To be German? To be Kenyan? Obviously, this is not a new question. The state of Germany sought on a massive level to answer that question—what does it mean to be German?— leading to the Holocaust. Cambodia’s genocide during the Khmer Rouge regime of ethnic Vietnamese, Chinese, and other minorities (including religious minorities) is another example.
Questions to ponder:
- How is the decline of daily local newspapers shaping our view of nationalism today?[5]
- Similarly, how does the role of the internet foster (or deconstruct) our nationalistic identities?[6]
- Who are the gatekeepers of our languages in our global, digital age? Why does that matter for national identities?[7]
- What is the relationship between globalization and nationalism?
- How can we, as followers of Jesus, understand the Kingdom of God juxtaposed over our “map” of nationalism and nation-states? Anderson suggests that nationalism creates the nation-state as a “sacred community”; how do we live with the tension between our loyalties?
Finally, I believe Eriksen offers a fitting answer to my question of Anderson: Why is it helpful for us today to understand the origin and spread of nationalism? Eriksen suggests that, on the one hand, we are witnessing powerful forces of homogenization on national and global scales; yet on the other hand particular identities continue to emerge and exert themselves.[8] Perhaps the upheavals we are witnessing politically suggest that the nation-state as we know it is too small to solve the problems facing humanity, yet too big to give people a sense of community;[9] we need a new framework. For people who identify as followers of Jesus, I would suggest we look to the Kingdom of God to give us that foundation.
[1] Benedict Anderson, Imagined Communities : Reflections on the Origin and Spread of Nationalism, (London: Verso, 2016), 56.
[2] Ibid., 6.
[3] Thomas Hylland Eriksen. Ethnicity and Nationalism. (London: Pluto, 2002), 7. See also Anderson, 68.
[4] Ibid., 113.
[5] cf Anderson, 62.
[6] Eriksen suggests that “most Internet use confirms existing identities rather than transcending them” 105.
[7] Anderson, 74.
[8] “Although people in a certain sense become more similar because of modernisation, they simultaneously become more distinctive.” Eriksen, 162.
[9] Ibid., 163.
About the Author
Katy Drage Lines
In God’s good Kingdom, some minister like trees, long-standing, rooted in a community. They embody words of Wendell Berry, “stay years if you would know the genius of the place.” Others, however, are called to go. Katy is one of those pilgrims. A global nomad, Katy grew up as a fifth generation Colorado native, attended college & seminary and was ordained in Tennessee, married a guy from Pennsylvania, ministered for ten years in Kenya, worked as a children’s pastor in a small church in Kentucky, and served college students in a university library in Orange County, California. She recently moved to the heart of America, Indianapolis, and has joined the Englewood Christian Church community, serving with them as Pastor of Spiritual Formation. She & her husband Kip, have two delightful boys, a college junior and high school junior.10 responses to “Imagined Communities: Benedict Anderson’s Exploration into Nationalism’s Origins”
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Great job summarizing and applying Anderson’s historical/sociological sketch of nationalism. It so inhabits our modern understanding that we forget how recent nation-states came into being. For global leaders today, you should also consider the ways that Balkanization both exemplifies and pushes against theories of nationalism.
I appreciate you bringing Eriksen into the discussion, as he expands Anderson’s sketch with a number of helpful theories for researchers. As participants in the Kingdom of God, we need to be especially astute in recognizing what Eriksen calls “the myth of ethnic election.” In seeking to distinguish clear distinctions of us/them, ethnicities and nations come to believe that god has chosen and especially favored us as opposed to them. The Kingdom of God, as Good News for all people, should prophetically speak to this in all contexts.
First of all, Katy, I really liked the way you summarized the book.
You pointed out some of the same “disconnects” that I saw in the book. For example, Anderson said that “nations inspire love, and often profoundly self-sacrificing love.” (p. 141) Yet we can see that there is still racial hatred.
I agree with you that as Christians we have the answer to forming truly loving communities. We can look to God’s picture of community in His Kingdom.
Thanks Mary.
I would want to clarify that simply because someone loves (even to the point of death), does not mean that they do not hate. We can see that perhaps most clearly in the personification of hatred, Nazi Germany– a people who loved “their” country so much they wanted it for themselves, to the exclusion of those who didn’t fit their criteria. We (all) find it much easier to love US and hate THEM. What we haven’t yet figured out is that in the shalom of God (the way God intends), we are all US; there is no THEM.
Great post Katy. You ask an important question, one that other Christians and I have asked through the years.
“How can we, as followers of Jesus, understand the Kingdom of God juxtaposed over our “map” of nationalism and nation-states?”
My first entry into another culture brought me to a point where I realized that I was quickly and neatly slotted into a unique “American” box. It wasn’t’ the box I knew, but a box nonetheless. I remember telling someone that we are Americans and they answered, “No you’re not! You are from the United States. The United States has no right to claim the name America.” You briefly mention this phenomenon in your post. That was the first of many times I would hear that reasoning.
Truth is, I am an American and I’m very proud of that! My grandparents came from Italy in the early 1900’s and continued to speak with an accent until they passed on. However, I am a Christian too, and therefore a part of the Kingdom of God. This family is described in the book of Revelation.
“After this I looked and behold, a great multitude that no one could number, from every nation, from all tribes and peoples and languages, standing before the throne and before the Lamb, clothed in white robes, with palm branches in their hands”
I’m blessed and grateful to be a part of that family as well.
Thanks Jim.
As someone who has lived many years overseas, you may understand the way I wrestle with my national identity. Though I’ve been back for nearly 10 years, I do not “feel” much like an American, but more like I only have one foot in this nation. (For MKs, they often identify as “Third-Culture Kids”, not part of either home or resident cultures, but a blend of the two.) Living in Kenya changed me, as I imagine your time in Eastern Europe has you. Doesn’t mean I don’t feel an affinity for America; it does mean I do feel emotionally distant from it.
The creation of earth began with separation. The sun, moon, and stars are separate but were placed in the space and provide energy and light to the earth. Gender identification, man and woman. As the world increased, Jews and Gentiles.
As the Word speaks that the body of Christ is made of many members but we all have gifts to bring that we should utilize in unity.
I had many questions on why and I reading this book, but I quickly brushed it away and this semester I am reading the assignments to determine what can I get out of this.
I always enjoy your post.
Wow Katy- you sure delivered some great points on this post. Your questions were reflective and interesting to ponder. I especially liked your Erikson points. It’s a comforting fact to know as followers of Jesus we belong to a community that supersedes all other nations and brings us together speaking the common language of love. Yes, the Kingdom of God offers a strong and sound foundation.
Excellent summary and insight, Katy. After visiting other countries, the USA has an unwieldiness about it. Your comment, “Perhaps the upheavals we are witnessing politically suggest that the nation-state as we know it is too small to solve the problems facing humanity, yet too big to give people a sense of community;” speaks to this. I’m sure citizens of other countries feel the same way about their country, no matter how large or small, but I feel our sense of American community has given way to jingoism that paints on a facade of national pride, and our large nation, with all its resources, cannot solve even small problems without tremendous infighting.
I want to believe that people in pursuit of the Kingdom can be different, but the church as a whole (at least the evangelicalism of which I’ve been a part) seems to have instead taken on the role of its own nation-state, complete with “customs” and immigration policies where gatekeepers decide who is admitted and who is denied entry. How do we, as leaders with true global perspectives, shift the church back to Kingdom thinking?
Ah, excellent question. “How do we, as leaders with true global perspectives, shift the church back to Kingdom thinking?”
First, I would encourage us to not give up hope. To remember that, even in Israel, not everyone understood God’s covenant and their faithfulness to it; look for the remnant, and celebrate when you find small places that point to God’s Kingdom.
Second, the words we choose to use are important. When we have opportunities to speak, teach, write, preach and pray, we speak the language of the Kingdom of God. We use “we” vs. “I” and terms for community. Often speaking it brings a sense of it becoming reality.
Third (there should always be a third, right?), we choose to live in such a way that we ourselves try to mirror God’s Kingdom to others, and align ourselves with others who are also seeking to live faithfully.
“Perhaps the upheavals we are witnessing politically suggest that the nation-state as we know it is too small to solve the problems facing humanity, yet too big to give people a sense of community;”
This statement is so powerful! Our nation has problems facing hunanity that we created by our desire to be superior, powerful and wealthy. Driven by our desires we have created division within our country that keep us from experiencing community with each other. As a means to create a sense of belongings our citizens have formed their own groups and communities that do not bridge the gaps but increase our divide. That recognition is painful . I believe it is so important to figure out how we reflect Christ to one another. How do we as believers become ministers of reconciliation? While we know that we are called to do so, it is the how that is the challenge we face as believers.