Nationalism, in Eritrea and all colonial created states or others alike, be it moderate or ultra, was an intense enthusiasm, which in most cases has been explained as ideological movement that normally opposed colonial or external rule. Yet, it was that very external rule that laid the ground for the nationalism, which nationalists made their core value or ethos in fighting the external rule. Nationalists were supposed to expel external rule and help create state that reflects the reality of the native societies in the new nation, not to destroy or forge their version of society at whim. Because in so doing they create mistrust, hatred and cleavage among the given society. They, therefore, end up neither building the externally created nationalism nor do they create a compromise (between the native reality and the colonial reality) state. In our 21st century it becomes even worse when internationalism surpasses nationalism. In a situation where tribal and ethnic identities are still strongly rooted, which of the two – nationalism or internationalism – provide panacea? Nationalism as a sentiment or even ideology failed badly to replace or dissolve tribal or ethnic identities. Yes because nationalism as a movement, at least practically as we have seen it in Eritrea, aimed not to restore what was destroyed by colonial or external rule. Rather it camouflaged as national, but failed to reconcile with the reality of Eritrean society. As both the Italian, the British and the Ethiopian external rules did forging, destroying and re-engineering of Eritrean tribal, ethnic and geographical realities, so did the Eritrean nationalism elites. Internationalism is a process imposed by the advanced technologies, which forced or made the world to become a small village and everything is possible everywhere from everywhere and as easy and fast as one needs it to be. In fact, those who control or have great influence on such globalization would also want the safety of the globe, rule of law and respect for different human values and interest prevail. By so becoming it is safe to say that unlike nationalism, internationalism is a process, which allows a natural development of things and natural process lasts. Therefore, nationalism elites should wake up of their illusion and not try to kill by force tribal and ethnic identities by forging, oppressing, ignoring, undermining and imposing. The question should be: will internationalism surpass nationalism to make tribal and ethnic identities positive factors?
Posted on: Mon, 02 Sep 2013 11:18:27 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015