The Gandhi And Joseph Mazzini Essay

Niloufer Bhagwat’s “The Political Relevance and Global Impact of Mahatma Gandhi” conveys her stance on Gandhi’s influence on how different groups of people combated forms of oppression. Bhagwat says “wherever the political, economic, social, and ecological future of humanity and… earth is debated and discussed, Gandhiji with his simple precepts provides a guidance for all generations” (Bhagwat 33). I believe that her argument successfully convinces the reader that the principles Gandhi followed and the strategies he used, non-violent civil disobedience and non-cooperation, not Gandhi himself, left a lasting impact on the world.

Nationalism has been extremely important and influential in shaping the modern world we see today, causing revolutions, rebellions and the constant reshaping of world maps continuing even today. Its appeal is something that I don’t believe will diminish in the future. Many theologians and political commentators alike agree that Nationalism has perhaps been one of the most prominent political ideologies of the modern world “No single political doctrine has played a more prominent role in shaping the face of the modern world than nationalism” 1, and doesn’t look like ceasing to be as influential anytime

Nationalism inspires a pride within a group of people that ignites change and strengthens unity. It is what keeps heritages and cultures of nations alive. But what happens when the people advocating Nationalism are trapped within a nation in which they do not desire to be? The Pan-Slavic movement in Eastern Europe in the early 20th Century created a tension between Austria-Hungary and Serbia that culminated in

Nationalism is a powerful force that can unite people working towards a common goal, but when it is taken to the extreme it can cause major disharmony in society, evident in the numerous genocides during the Age of Imperialism, the Fascist party's rise to power, and the Japanese’s unwillingness to surrender during World War II. Nationalism is dangerous, because it warps the minds of the individuals in the organization, creates prejudice and discrimination, and can be easily manipulated into a weapon against humanity.

Nationalism was coined back in the 1770’s it has a major role in the shaping many nations throughout the world. Nationalism has many positive and negative aspects to it. Nationalism has the strength to unify people despite their classes. It also has the ability to united people to lead movements against oppressive governments. There is a downside Nationalism can as method to evoke fear. The biggest negative is that most nationalism movement’s inevitably led to some form of conflict. Nationalism is a dangerous movement that can lead to oppression of opposition groups and lead to conflicts.

Nationalism has played a crucial role in world history over the past centuries. It continues to do so today. For many, nationalism is indelibly associated with some of the worst aspects of modern history, such as the destructive confidence of the Napoleon’s army and the murderous pride of Nazi Germany. Large numbers of people, descent in their hearts, have carried out unbelievable atrocities for no better reason than their nation required them to. Authoritarian and totalitarian regime have crushed dissent, eliminated opposition, and trampled on civil liberties in the name of the nation.

Today, the scourge of nationalism continues to infect humanity. Without doubt, in some circles, nationalism is hotly debated. For most people, however, the concept of nationalism is rarely questioned. In fact, it 's a foregone conclusion that people should love the nation in which they reside. Some people even take great pride in the fact that they were arbitrarily born in a specific geographical location. Unfortunately, like religion or capitalism, nationalism is alive and well in the 21st century.

Nationalism can be described as a mix, multidimensional morally developed or created concept involving a shared common identification with one's Nation. It is more on politically motivated towards working and maintaining self-governance, or full sovereignty, working towards to a specific land or a territory of historical significance to the group such as land and its belongings. In simple Nationalism is a nation command and lead itself, free from foreign influence, it is the concept of self-rule. Nationalism is further formed towards maintaining and developing a Sovereignty based on shared features such as religion, language, race, culture, or either political goals or a belief in a customary ancestry. So its pride towards nation's achievements, and the concept in world history has shown positive and negative impact, moreover in a political dimension it leads either unification or disintegration.

Aroused by the massacre of Amritsar in 1919, Gandhi devoted his life to gaining India’s independence from Great Britain. As the dominant figure used his persuasive philosophy of non-violent confrontation, he inspired political activists with many persuasions throughout the world (Andrews 23). Not only was Mahatma Gandhi a great peacemaker, but also his work to achieve freedom and equality for all people was greatly acknowledged. Gandhi’s unconventional style of leadership gained him the love of a country and eventually enabled him to lead the independence movement in India.

Nationalism is a widely debated ideology that differs based on the historian’s definition. For example, Benedict Anderson attempts to define nationalism as "an imagined political community [that is] imagined as both inherently limited and sovereign"(Anderson, pg 6). Anderson also believes the main causes of nationalism can be

10. What did Gandhi mean that he was not talking about “passive” revolt? Note these events: “In the end, the British will walk out”; 100,000 Englishmen cannot control 350 million Indians if they refuse to cooperate … Note the terms used: The difference between passive aggression (very popular in many personality studies today) and passive non-cooperation--The gamble of inconsistency is most damaging to which?

Nationalism has become one of the most powerful uniting-and occasionally separating-powers of the modern age. Throughout history, there were numerous countries that exemplified both sides of this classic European belief. However, as time has passed, this pride and promotion of one’s country has developed far beyond the scope of Europe. Nationalist feelings fester in all parts of the globe now, and with that comes more complicated expressions of the sentiment, as well as carefully crafted governments that exist for the sole support of nationalist fervor.

Before surveying the Marxist-Leninist interpretation of nationalism, one must examine the common uses of nationalism and the anthropological definitions that are frequently used. It would be an impressive feat to find two anthropologists who can completely agree on a definition for nationalism. Ernest Gellner defined

Nationalism at its core is the support of a country. The goal of a country is to have some sort of resonance within the individuals that reside there that call themselves citizens. If the citizens don’t feel any connection with their country, they may move to find one that they feel closer too. Once found, they may support the country over others, defend it within conversations of politics or just find groups that have the same ideals they do about the country. This papers purpose is to illustrate the pros of nationalism as well as its cons.

However, nationalism does not have one single definition, its meaning has evolved as society changes and modernises. Nationalism can “...refer to any behaviour designed to restore, maintain, or advance public images of that national community” (Gries, 2005:9). By the mid-1960s there were two main proposals to understanding nationalism. “In the first, nationalism was an aspect of national history, a sentiment associated with the nation...In the second approach, nationalism was a modern, irrational doctrine which could acquire sufficient power...to generate nationalists sentiments and even nation states” (Gellner, 2008:xx). Nationalism is defined differently by different schools of thought and theorists.