The Concept of Nationalism

It's a rainy, cold day here and I've spent the morning drinking tea and reading. As such I feel inspired to post a follow-up to the last article I wrote on Canadian Patriotism.

In order to provide some context and information to you on the basis for my perception of nationalism, and in order to help me establish it further in my own mind, I want to lay out for you how Benedict Anderson conceptualizes and defines nationalism. 

Nationalism can be defined as an imagined political community which is both inherently limited and sovereign. 

Imagined: It is imagined because even though the members of even the smallest nation will     never know their fellow-members, in the minds of each lives the image of their communion. 

Or, as Ernest Renan also wrote: "Or l'essence d'une nation est que tous les individus aient beaucoup de choses en commun, et aussi que tous aient oublie bien des choses." 

Communities are therefore distinguished not by their genuineness, but by the style in which they are imagined. 

Limited: A nation as imagined is limited because even the largest of them has finite, (though elastic) boundaries, beyond which lie other nations. (Thus a nation will never be like a religion, or political ideology which might dream for the entire planet to be, one day, of that religion or ideology).

Sovereign: It is considered to be the most natural emblem of freedom, in the sense that the nation-state is today considered to be the most natural form of social organization (I would argue that this has filled the void left by religious conquest, ever since the period of Enlightenment).  

Community: It is imagined as a community because, regardless of the actual inequality and exploitation that occurs within each, the nation is always conceived of as a deep, horizontal comradeship. 

What amazes me is that, it is this fraternity that makes it possible for many millions of people, to either kill or willingly die for such limited imaginings. (And I say this, remember as a loyal and self-confident member of the Canadian Armed Forces). 

A key question is raised by Anderson's concepts and definitions of nationalism:

When you consider that these imaginings are fairly superficial to the rational mind (in the sense that the idea or legitimacy of the nation-state has only existed for scarcely more than 2 centuries), how can it cause humanity to inflict such colossal sacrifices on one another?

It is precisely this question, switching the word "identity" in place of nationalism that I wish to anwer at LSE, in some form or another.