Nationalism can be defined as a deep sense of loyalty and devotion that one feels for one's own race and country. It is a set of emotions that is nurtured over thousands of
years. And as agrarian communities give way to modern urban societies, nationalism today has also evolved into a form that is quite different from the ancient one that we know of.

　　Nationalism in the old days did not just refer to loyalty to the country. It was closely tied up with loyalty to the emperor or sovereign king. Both were inseparable. Chinese general Yue Fei's undivided loyalty to the country and the Song emperor (who was misled by corrupt court officials) was what led to his tragic death years ago.

　　Empirical evidences also showed that early nationalism had its origin in regional and blood ties. Unless a grouping was assured that the interests of its own families and communities were met, it would be difficult for them to fulfil their duties and obligations to the country. This was why when a new emperor was enthroned, he would confer titles
and territories to his kinsmen. Such feudal practices were also common among regional government officials. The wider sense of patriotism to the emperor and country could only be
stimulated in turbulent times when a country was in danger of invasion by outside forces.

　　This form of early nationalism was suitable for old economies that were basically agrarian in nature, and interdependence and communication links among them were limited. Under these circumstances, rulers resorted to power politics to preserve their territories and their system of government. And power politics went hand in hand with nepotism and cronyism.

　　Actually, it is not difficult to understand why ancient rulers behaved in this manner. In primeval times, tribal chiefs and their members had to resort to power to ensure
the survival of their whole community.

　　Today, however, a different perspective of nationalism has been taken. People can now differentiate between loyalty to the individual ruler and loyalty to the country. They
would not rise to calls for nationalism unless the interests of the ruler and theirs are identical, that is, they truly reflect the interests of the country. To love the country is
to love its citizenry. This is fundamental. Loyalty to the nation and country must take precedence over blood ties and loyalty to an individual or to a community.

　　Unfortunately, social progress does not take place evenly. As a result, the new concept of nationalism also evolves at a different pace. In some societies, people still hold on to the narrow brand of nationalism --- one that is confined to their region. These people place high regard for their immediate families, then relatives, then clans and then regions or religious groups. 　　Examples of these are found in many developing countries, where many of their citizens unscrupulously sacrifice national interests for their own benefits or those of their groups. For these people, loyalty to the country is secondary. They would only npursue national interests or turn to diplomacy when their individual or their group's interests need to be protected.

　　So how do we reinforce the modern concept of nationalism? We need to understand that rights and responsibilities are paradoxes. On one hand, a person needs to be given some political rights before he is able to perform his civic duties. On the other hand, a civic
conscious person will demand rights that are due to him. In time to come, as a society modernises, people's rights and responsibilities should be balanced.

　　Once the majority in a society are able to exert their rights and fulfil their responsibilities, they will regard themselves as masters of their country and their own
destiny. Citizens whose nationalism is built on this foundation are likely to have acquired a high level of modern civic consciousness.

　　Governments of developing countries need to understand this simple principle if they want to conduct education and publicity programmes effectively to promote the new concept
of nationalism among their citizens.

　　Generally, governments find it effective to use the mass media to transmit nationalistic values as they are penetrating and far-reaching. At the same time, governments should, at appropriate times, respond with changes in civic laws and regulations in order to support the new concept of nationalism.

　　In a nutshell, national education should be accompanied by legal changes that would accord its people basic civil rights. Without this guarantee of basic civil and individual
rights, a country's citizens would not be able to say that they are masters of their destiny. Then there is no need to talk about setting up a law-abiding society or even creating a consciousness of the new concept of nationalism.

 

愛國主義內涵的變遷

　　愛國主義是千百年來形成的對自己民族國家的一種深厚的感情。但是，現代社會和傳統社會對愛國主義有著不同的要求。

　　首先，傳統意義上的愛國是與忠君聯系在一起的，它把對君主個人的忠誠與對國家的忠誠混為一談，不加區分。這是宋代名將岳飛悲劇發生的主要原因。

　　其次，在多數人的行為準則中，地方的和血緣的忠誠強于對國家的忠誠。只有在確保了自己家族和本地的利益之后，才談得上行使對國家的義務。這是為什么君主登基之后都要大肆進行血緣分封，而地方官員也要任人唯親，甚至封建割據盛行的主要原因。只是在面對異族入侵時，傳統意義上的愛國情感才能被激發出來。

　　傳統愛國主義的這種特征在當時的合理性在于，在自然經濟的基礎上，各地的經濟聯系以及與此相適應的交通能力都非常有限，因此強權政治是統治者維系國家統治的基本手段，而強權只能與任人唯親相吻合。

　　這一點，我們還可以從原始氏族首領和其成員的首要任務和崇高義務，就是維護自己血緣氏族的生存利益中一目了然。現代意義上的愛國主義則明確的把對領袖個人的忠誠和對“國家”這一政治共同體
的忠誠區別開來，只有當領袖和政府的利益與全體人民的利益相一致時，當他們能夠真正代表“國家”時，愛國主義才延及他們。

　　因此，愛國就是愛全體人民，這是愛國主義的根本所在。在社會關系中，它要求對民族國家的忠誠戰勝人倫的、地方的和血緣的忠誠。

　　在轉型中的社會，社會發展的不平衡和價值觀念的沖突使人們的愛國主義觀念有很大的不同。一方面，我們可以看到狹隘的地方忠誠在人們心目中仍然占據著重要的地位。很多人的首要義務是忠于他的
近親，然后擴至家族、部族、地域的或宗教集團。正如我們在很多發展中國家所看到的，很多人對以犧牲國家利益為代價來增進個人或小集團的利益的行為并不感到內疚。

　　反之，卻要受到冷落和歧視。血緣和地方的忠誠總是強于對民族國家的忠誠。他們只有在保護小集團利益的基礎上或與外國人打交道時才愿意履行忠于國家的義務。

　　那么，如何才能確立現代愛國主義的價值觀呢？我們知道，權利和義務是一對矛盾，人們只有享受到一定的權利，才會自覺地去盡義務；反之，盡了一定義務的人，必然會要求自己應該享受的權利。從
社會發展來看，一個社會越是具有現代性，它的公民的權利和義務就越是平衡。

　　在此基礎上，當一個社會中大多數人的權利和義務都得到了基本實現的時候，他們就會把自己看成是國家和社會的主人。在這個基礎上發展起來的愛國主義是一種自覺程度很高、現代性很強的思想意識。

　　反之，在一個缺乏民主意識和公民意識的國度里，或者說，在一個公民權利實現程度很低、只講奉獻的傳統國度里，很難使人做到用國家的忠誠來取代個人的、血緣的和地方的忠誠。在很多發展中國家，愛國主義與其他的基本價值觀一樣，正處于價值轉換階段，還含有很多傳統的因素，與現代國家的基本要求有很大的差距。

　　培育現代價值觀是很多發展中國家文化建設和愛國主義教育中必不可少的重要內容。只有明確認識到這一點，我們才能主動地去培育和宣傳這種現代意識。

　　具體來說，經常、普遍和有效的手段就是通過各種媒介進行傳播。這種傳播可能是無形的，但其影響力是深遠的。在此基礎上要適時的取消和制定相應的法規，以推動這種現代價值觀的發展。只有在法治的條件下，現代價值觀才能最終在全社會得到認同。沒有法制保障人民主權和個人權利的實現，人民就不會有當家作主的意識，而沒有當家作主的意識，法制社會的建立以及現代愛國主義和集體主義從何談起？