Anderson, B. (2006). Imagined Communities (Revised ed.). New York: Verso Books
Soumya Sinha
Benedict Anderson’s “Imagined Communities” represents a seminal work delving into the intricate historical and cultural origins of nationalism, and how it has shaped modern society. First published in 1983, the book has acquired an iconic status within the field of nationalism studies, establishing a compelling argument that nationalism is a product of modernity emerging in response to transformations in the political and economic structures of societies. Anderson focuses on three main ideas in his book: the nation as an imagined social construct, the role of print capitalism in the spread of national consciousness, and the historical contingency of nationalism.
To properly understand the book’s significance in scholarly discourse, it is crucial to consider the historical context of its publication. The Preface of the Second Edition frames this background as a pivotal moment in history, occurring during the height of the Cold War. In particular, the Sino-Vietnamese border war in early 1979 was a significant event, as it marked the first instance in which a communist nation had launched an attack on another communist nation. The intense global competition between the capitalism of the West and the communism of the East had polarised academic debate in keeping with the ideological division of the world. The impact of this polarisation is visible in Anderson’s emphasis on the role of print-capitalism and language in nation building.
Moreover, the book broke into academia at a time when the post-colonial world was grappling with the legacies of colonialism, and new nation-states struggling to create their national identities were emerging. Anderson’s book, therefore, was not only a theoretical exploration of nationalism but also a practical guide for understanding the challenges of nation-building in a post-colonial world.
At the core of Anderson’s analysis lies the notion that national identity is not a pre-existing phenomenon, but is instead a social construct; a product of the collective imagination of those who identify themselves as part of that nation. He traces the historical development of nationalism and provides two different explanations for its development. The first process begins with the development of print capitalism and the spread of vernacular print-languages into the emergence of an imagined community as its readership. This imaginative process is engendered through a complex web of cultural practices, such as the adoption of a common language, shared historical narratives, and the creation of national symbols and myths. He argues that the development of print capitalism, with the rise of newspapers and novels, created a shared culture and language; a ‘horizontal comradeship’, that allowed people to imagine themselves as part of a larger national community.
The second account places the emergence of nationalism in Europe during the late eighteenth century as a product of the French and American Revolutions, which challenged the legitimacy of traditional forms of political authority. He claims that while the modern notion of nationalism is firmly rooted in the European paradigm, it first emerged in the Americas and the creole nations of Southeast Asia. Language played a significant role in this process, as creole pioneers often developed a new form of communication that combined elements of Western and local languages. This new language, according to Anderson, served as a key instrument for inclusion, allowing nationalists to communicate their ideas to a broader audience and creating a sense of shared identity among diverse groups of people.
Anderson argues that the imagined community of the nation is not only a cultural phenomenon but also a political one. He suggests that nationalism is a tool of the ruling elites, who use it to legitimize their power and control over the masses. His interdisciplinary approach integrates history, anthropology, and political theory, providing a nuanced and multifaceted understanding of nationalism. His work uncovers the intimate relationship between nationalism and modernity, showcasing how nationalism is shaped by the changing political and economic structures, as well as the cultural and symbolic practices of societies.
However, his work has also faced criticism, particularly from postcolonial scholars who argue that his analysis is Eurocentric and fails to account for the experiences of colonized peoples. Even though he acknowledges the role of colonialism and imperialism in the nationalist movements, he overlooks the ways in which nationalism was used to justify colonialism, promoting exclusionary and oppressive ideologies that created hierarchies of power and privilege.
The idea of nation-ness as the most universally legitimate value itself doesn’t sit right. Not only does it imply that the Western model of a nation is fundamentally the ‘most correct’ form of viewing a nation, it discounts any further debate by generalising the phenomenon. Partha Chatterjee’s critique of Anderson challenges the idea of the nation as being imagined from certain modular forms. Chatterjee argues that nationalism is not rooted in identity but rather in the difference of the modular forms of the nationalist society propagated by the modern West. He suggests that the meaning of the term ‘imagined community’ is not universal. Instead, if a nation is imagined, it is imagined differently by different nations. Chatterjee also critiques Anderson’s concept of ’empty, homogeneous time’ and politics of universalism, arguing that time is heterogeneous and unevenly dense, and therefore politics cannot be the same for all people.
Furthermore, critics argue that Anderson’s concept of “imagined communities” is overly simplistic and fails to account for the diversity of experiences within a nation. National identity is not a monolithic construct but is instead shaped by a complex interplay of historical, cultural, and social factors. Hobsbawm elaborates on this by stating that for the ordinary people, “nation” is not a singular kind of identification solely made by capital/time. Nation cannot be separated from the pre-existing cultures like Anderson has done. In this sense, his emphasis on the cultural construction of national identity overlooks the ways in which power relations and structural inequalities shape its formation.
Additionally, Anderson’s evaluation of the medieval period appears to rely solely on two works by Annales historians: Marc Bloch’s La société féodale (1939) and Lucien Febvre’s L’apparition du livre (1958). Consequently, his conclusions are built upon a restricted body of evidence, which raise concerns about the validity of his generalizations. For instance, his assertion that the universality of Latin in medieval Western Europe never corresponded to a universal political system seems contradictory to his own original theses.
Anderson’s analysis of nationalism overlooks certain crucial factors that also contribute to its emergence and development. While he emphasizes the economic underpinnings of capitalism as a driving force behind nationalism, he overlooks the cultural factors that play a role in its formation. His theory presupposes nationalism to be a unifying force that fosters inclusivity but it can also be an exclusive force, reinforcing social divisions. Similarly, Anderson posits language as an instrument of inclusion, without considering the ways in which it can be used to exclude certain groups. What this results in is a utopian image of nationalism which all countries must aspire to, disregarding the cultural and social bases that may influence the way in which nationalism is born.
Despite these critiques, Anderson’s book remains an important contribution to the study of nationalism, highlighting the ways in which shared cultural symbols shape our understanding of belonging and community. The criticisms of his work underscore the importance of taking a more nuanced and intersectional approach, recognising the power relations and hierarchies which influence the evolution of nationalism.
His thesis on the role of print capitalism in shaping national identity becomes even more significant in the current era of globalization and the growth of transnational communities. The internet and social media have made it easier for people to connect across national borders, leading to the emergence of new forms of community that transcend traditional notions of nationhood. However, these communities are still imagined, and the idea of the nation as an imagined community remains central to contemporary discussions of identity and belonging
Anderson’s exploration of vernacular languages’ role in creating a national sense of community and the connection between nationalism and violence holds great relevance in today’s world. As linguistic rights and cultural recognition remain contested, and ethnic and religious conflicts persist, nationalism is frequently used as a legitimizing force for acts of violence. His work also offers valuable insights into how the state employs symbols and rituals to shape national identity, which is particularly relevant in contemporary times marked by identity politics and a heightened focus on cultural and ethnic identities. His analysis highlights the dual nature of this process, which can be both inclusive and exclusive, and provides a framework for understanding how the state’s construction of national identity intersects with larger discussions of belonging and exclusion.
Soumya Sinha is an Undergraduate Political Science student at Sri Venkateswara College, University of Delhi, India.
