also be used, secondly, of the theory, principle, or ideal implicit in this historical development. No one thinker could hope to express finally or adequately a massmovement of this kind. Nationalism, as an operative force, has had many apologists and many antagonists: as an ideal it has had one prophet, Mazzini. In his Duties of Man, and in other writings, he attempted to express the idea of the Nation, the idea of Nationality, the part which the Nation was capable of playing, if men would rise to the opportunity, in the progress of the human Much that is inconsistent with Mazzini's ideal has been credited, rightly or wrongly, to Nationalism; and we must, therefore, be prepared to make a distinction, where necessary, between the principle and its practice.

race.

Both as a movement and as a theory Nationalism is primarily concerned with the political groupings of men. But it is to the political unit or State, as we have seen, that patriotism is supposed mainly to attach itself. Both patriotism and nationalism are expressed in forms which are not political or not purely political; but these are of secondary importance. Nationalism, therefore, presents itself to us as a theory as to the proper unit of government, and therefore of patriotism, and as a historical tendency to develop such units. The unit in question is, of course, the nation. There can be little doubt that the nation is the dominating political

idea of the present time; that it is essentially a new idea, distinctive of the period through which we are passing; and that to-day anyone who wishes to appeal to the patriotic feelings of his fellow men will tend to use this idea in preference to any other. "Nation " has acquired a prestige and popularity far in excess of its possible rivals, "State," City," County," "Province,' Region." It is the fundamental social and political fact of the present day.*

44

44

44

*If an illustration of the obvious is permitted, I would cite the following striking letter, which appeared in the New Statesman on March 15th, 1919. Though the word Nation " is not so much as mentioned, the idea controls the whole argument.

THE STATE.

To the Editor of the New Statesman.'

"Sir,-Why do supporters of nationalisation of industries allow their case to be effectively prejudiced by the phrase The State'? To the average man The State' stands for such unpleasant things as laws, taxes, criminal trials, and the like. Laws, taxes and trials are all necessary, but in the abstract they are not popular, and by clever manipulation individualists, capitalists and similar obsolescent people have succeeded in conveying to the average man the idea that a semi-Satanic personality resides behind The State,' a personality unhuman if not inhuman, and against which it behoves all decent people to break a lance.

The

Suppose that all through the war we had talked about State. Suppose we had said to recruits: The State needs you'; to our men in the trenches: Stand fast for the State,' or had emblazoned over the graves of our dead, He died for the State.' What irresistible enthusiasm would have been called forth, what glamour of loyalty! Would Nelson have won the battle of Trafalgar if he had told his sailors what The State' expected of them?

“And yet we fight in our wars for the same entity as that to which we nationalisers now appeal. Call it The State,' and we make a present to our adversaries of an incomparable strategical position. But call it England' (or if our Scottish friends prefer, 'Britain '), say that England shall own her own industries, demand that the workers

§ 8. THE NATION AS FACT

What is a Nation? The question requires a double answer, according as we adopt the plane of fact or the plane of theory. Let us look first at the facts. Here the question means, what is the general nature of the various masses of humanity which call themselves, and are regarded by others as justified in calling themselves, nations ?

It will be wise to take our own country first, since we know it best. For international purposes it is known as England; but it consists of four “countries,” England, Scotland, Wales, and Ireland, disposed on two islands,

shall toil not for the good of a private employer, but for the good of all England, and who shall withstand so splendid a battle-cry?

"And it is a sincere cry. What does England mean to each one of us? It means every man, woman and child we meet, whether known to us or unknown. It means that, were our industries nationalised, every miner, every railwayman, every sailor, would know that each stroke of work he put in was for them; that the appeal to him to do his best came from every woman and child in his country, and that if he did not fail them, they for their part-the much-maligned State' of our opponents, but in truth our own dear England-would stand by the men who worked for them. And men will still respond to the call to work for England and for the happier homes of all her children. "Does this seem a small point to your readers? I would urge that, such is the force of prejudice, it is a vital point which may mean the difference between victory and defeat, or, at least, the indefinite postponement of our cause. The love of our country, by which we chiefly mean the love of our countrymen, is a true thing, which the working men of England have in their hearts, and can be taught to possess still more. If they are themselves allowed the conditions of a happy and healthy life, they will give of their best for their countrymen, but not for a limited liability company.-Yours, etc., "SOLDIER."

and is officially described as the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland. (The British Dominions Beyond the Seas must be left out of the reckoning for the present). Why is this area supposed to include one nation? Presumably because its inhabitants are believed to form a homogeneous group, inhabiting a continuous area of land and united by real bonds which are not created but merely recognised by the existing unity of political institutions. The various groups within this group-the English, the Scotch, the Welsh, the Irish-though different from one another, are yet more closely related and inter-connected with one another than with any similar group outside these islands. These four main groups are themselves often dignified with the title of nations; but it will be convenient to reserve the term nation for such groups as possess or claim independent political status. We shall, therefore, describe the United Kingdom as a nation composed of four sub-nations. But here we are met by the case of Ireland. Most Irishmen are profoundly dissatisfied with the analysis implied in this description, and with the political status which follows from it. Many Irishmen claim for their country the completely independent status of a nation; and there is no known criterion which will decide with certainty whether this claim is or is not justified. Thus if Ireland is included, there is considerable doubt whether the political entity commonly

referred to as England is a single nation. If Ireland is excluded, we have what is perhaps as well attested a case of nationality as any in the world. The area which remains has been united for many centuries; its boundaries are clearly defined by the sea; and though more than one language is spoken within it, English is understood everywhere. There is thus good reason for saying, of Great Britain at any rate, that it is a unity recognised rather than created by political institutions. But, of course, we do not need to remind ourselves that this island did not always feel itself thus one; that historically we are a fusion of races; and that political institutions have in the past largely assisted in producing the unity which now they recognise and register.

Turning to the continent of Europe, we find that in the west most of the existing political groupings can be justified on similar grounds. In most cases it can be urged with more or less plausibility that the population united forms a homogeneous social group, which, while it exhibits a certain variety, yet contains no group of any size which would be likely to combine better into another political group, or which is dissatisfied with its present position and demands independent status. From south to north, there is Spain and Portugal, France, Belgium, Holland, Germany, and the Scandinavian countries. Portugal might easily have been a Spanish Ireland, but history has determined otherwise.