The concept of the nation is, historically, a rather recent phenomena. Unlike the proceeding associations of families, tribes, clans and kingdoms, even ancient empires, the nation is unique in that those who populate a nation associate, or are at least socialized to, with its given ethnic, linguistic, cultural, social and geographic characteristics. The most common form of nation within society today is the nation-state, a hierarchical organizing of the nation. It is my contention, however controversial, that the nation in and of itself, considered separately from state formations, is not inherently a negative concept.

Since the rise of the nation-state with the early industrial revolution, it has relied on both the exploitation of its national populace and that of those nations which have become subject to their imperialism and colonialism. In this, the nation-state uses its ideology, nationalism, to both justify and manipulate the peoples of the world, either to convince them of their need and reliance on the nation-state, or to rationalize the need to exploit and dominate other nations.

Nationalism replaced the old theological justifications of the monarchies before it. Rather than the worship of god, one is to worship the state itself. While the modern nation-states of today may claim to be secular, for example in the United States we have the supposed separation of church and state. However, religious ideology still influences and plays a role in the modern nation-state:

“The separation of state and religion is the result of political decision. It did not come naturally. This is why even today power and state seem to be a given, god-given we might say. Notions like secular state or secular power remain ambiguous.

The nation-state has also allocated a number of attributes which serve to replace older, religiously rooted attributes like nation, fatherland, national flag, national anthem and many others. Particularly notions like the unity of state and nation serve to transcend the material political structures and are, as such, reminiscent of the pre-state unity with god. They have replaced the divine.”i

However, unlike the religious states before them, the nation-state is capable of assimilating numerous religions underneath its national ideology. I say capable, because in some nation-states the old, dominating religions still hold incredible sway within the minds and actions of those within these nations themselves and in some cases, is used part and parcel with national rhetoric.

The nation-state is an absolute necessity to Capitalism. For the financial elite, the Capitalists, the nation-state acts as a fortress from which they may horde their wealth they have taken through imperialist and colonialist exploitation and domination of other nations. The nation-state may both defend those resources they have taken, while opening up access to new resources through the use of military and political action against those nations whom have a hold over them. Without the nation-state, Capitalism as an economic system would be incapable of functioning as the enforcement provided by the nation-state makes it reliant on both its material and ideological structures.

The nationalism of the nation-state is what justifies imperialist and colonialist expansion. In this way, the nation-state is able to forcefully open up new markets and access to resources under the guise of national security and interests. In reality, these resources and markets are being secured for the Capitalists, in order to extract resources from the subjugated nation to increase the ever expanding wealth of the Capitalists themselves. Through the expansion of Capitalist interests, the nation-state itself is able to expand its influence and power across the globe, making for a destructively symbiotic relationship.

Nationalism also serves to obscure and manipulate those peoples and nations that are subjugated within the nation-state itself. Concepts like “liberty” and “freedom” become empty phraseology in which the Capitalists may justify their exploitative and oppressive hold over the national economy, in which the means of production are privately held within the hands of the Capitalists. These conditions create the grounds for wage labor, in which one must choose to either sell their labor to the Capitalists or risk dying in the streets.

Those nations that became subjected to imperialism and colonialism found their cultures, languages, social structures and ecology destroyed at the hands of the dominating nation-state. Indigenous cultures the world over have found themselves in a battle between survival and genocide of their peoples. The nation-state has no interest in unity with other cultures and ways of life, its very structures are one that requires it to expand and defend its power, otherwise it may be perceived as weak, either by other nation-states or its own national populace.

We now find our world today to be one in which Capitalism itself has completely enveloped the entire world. Every nation-state finds itself, in one way or another, dependent on and connected to the Capitalist system. This makes the very concept of an independent nation-state problematic simply on a technical level. It is nearly impossible, not without greatly restrictive authoritarian measures and a severe impact to ones political and economic status, can a nation-state conceive of its own, complete independence from the Capitalist system.

So the questions arises, how are the peoples of a nation to liberate themselves without reconstructing the very same institutions of exploitation and domination? It is my contention, that the answer lies in the concept of an internationalist Anarchism. By this, I mean the understanding that, while we do live within a globalized Capitalism system, the majority of the population are allocated to living within their individual nation-states. If I am to be consistent as an Anarchist, it is my contention that the peoples ability, both individual and collective, to express themselves without exploitation or domination, that I must support the efforts of nations to liberate themselves from exploitation. This should not be confused with support for building a nation-state, far from it. I support the abilities of the oppressed the world over to practice their peoples social, linguistic, and cultural practices within their own lands and geographies.

That is to say, I support their ability to function as a nation. I do not, however, support some sort of crude “National Anarchism” that seeks to segregate and partition communities along supposed racial or ethnic lines. Rather, I support nations struggles towards their own liberation to become self-governing and directly in control of their society. This is understood to be possible through the active construction of self-governing and directly democratic institutions within and between nations. In this way, we can not only overcome the contradiction of the nation-state, but also work towards building a truly International and Anarchistic society, in which the freely liberated nations may act on their social, culture and linguistic practices, free from domination and exploitation.

iThe Political Thought of Abdullah Ocalan; Democratic Confederalism; The State and its Religious Roots; pg 33