Most nations of the world go out of their way to celebrate things they have, or believe they have, contributed to the world. They often latch onto the creations or achievements of a person or a whole community of a period when there was nothing similar in form to the modern nation. Sometimes the “achievements” claimed or celebrated, are, upon closer examination, responsible for so much mischief, that one wonders why they are still celebrated. Mongolia’s fascination with the figure of Genghis Khan is a good example of both. This sort of practice is so common I think we can all think of examples in every country.
When these achievements are of a more abstract or ideological nature, even the most admirable of principles can lead to sinister consequences. The most obnoxious obvious example I can think of is the American claim to be the world’s wellspring of freedom and democracy. The claim takes many forms, from the limited celebration of the entrance of America’s democracy onto the world stage, to a broader vision of America as being somehow uniquely capable of blessing the world with leadership and guidance. What I think is unique about this kind of nationalist claim is its powerful universal reach. That is, it goes beyond the traditional nationalist claim of, “Hey, my nation has a glorious history and kicks major butt” to reach beyond its borders and suggest there is a national responsibility to attend to the development of the rest of the world.
While America has gone through several “isolationist” periods, I don’t think this built-in aspect of American nationalism has ever disappeared completely. I also know that I’m not the first to argue that this is a feature America shares with Napoleon’s France and the Soviet proletarian revolution. It probably also shares much in common with another move, less particular to any single nation as it is a feature of the birth and development of nations in general (especially the colonial powers): the claim to champion progress and Civilization. All of these moves serve as a powerful justification for Empire, mass mobilization, and total war when they are effectively deployed.
Most nations like Norway, however, appear to be content to take pride in the invention of more mundane things. Of course, Norwegian-Americans can often be found with bumper stickers or mugs claiming, “Columbus had a Norwegian map,” which is a joking reference to the viking settlements in North America that long preceded Christopher’s trip across the ocean. However, I am told now that someone is making the more serious claim that Columbus had a Chinese map. Oh well. At least Norway invented paper clips.
I read this first in a fascinating book I skimmed through some years ago at a friend’s house in Stavanger. It was kind of a picture book of “Norwegian inventions.” Each page had a beautiful picture of some object that “Norway invented” and on the facing side was a short history of that particular object. Ferro-concrete and rubber boots were two of the book’s more memorable entries and probably not as controversial as the Norwegian claim to have invented skiing. But paper clips—how could I ever view these humble metal objects in the same way again? How can I avoid being filled with national pride at the way my dear humble Norway revolutionized the modern office environment at the turn of this century?
What is most farcical about this class of more modest claims, of course, is the way that an individual’s invention is transformed suddenly into the pride of a whole nation. Presumably, the inventiveness of the individual is a reflection of national character, intelligence, or the quality of its educational system. Fortunately, discussion of these national inventions and achievements now often retain only a sort of cocktail party trivia value. I wish I could say that this was always the case. Exceptions abound.
Many Chinese, and the Chinese government, for example, are rather unsure of how they are to respond to the achievements of overseas Chinese who make dazzling scientific discoveries, or when one of the most eloquent critics of their authoritarian government wins a nobel price for literature. Do you claim them for national pride? Ignore them? Or do you perhaps condemn them as traitors if they don’t come home? The Americans, of course, will claim for their own anyone who did research at its powerful universities and other institutes.
Another way that this becomes a big issue is when something like a Nobel prize becomes government currency to legitimize an education system or measure its degree of “creativity.” Japan’s Ministry of Education and many of Japan’s politicians are convinced that winning a certain number of nobel prizes is a great way to advance Japan’s reputation globally, as well as measure the progress of its educational reform. James Bartholomew has done a lot of research on this for those who are interested in learning more. Japan has announced the goal of winning 30 prizes over the next 50 years. One of many problems is, as Bartholomew pointed out in a presentation I saw him give at Berkeley a few years ago, the Nobel prize system has never been anything close to a fair and objective measure of scientific achievement (it was also structurally tilted in favor of Scandinavians at one point). He talked about Japan’s efforts to win science prizes in the prewar period and the amazing obstacles they faced in competing (as well as domestic discord which often sabotaged their chances). The Nobel prize process is one so mired in politics that the Japanese government has poured all sorts of money into coordinating its efforts nationally and playing the political lobbying campaign (see one interesting article here) that I seriously doubt that any eventual success of the policy can be linked to a general flowering of Japanese creativity and scientific prowess.
Now Norwegian paper clips, on the other hand—there is an achievement which can tell you a lot about that people in the cold north. The invention of paper clips doesn’t prove that Norwegians are necessarily more creative or even great scientists. It means, like the Norwegian word for paper clip, binders, itself means: the people of the Norwegian nation are bound together as one. This is best demonstrated by the fact (you can read one online retelling of this here, and on countless Norwegian web sites—the web never lies) that during the German occupation of Norway, Norwegians were forbidden to wear badges bearing the initials of their exiled king so instead they displayed their national unity by attaching paper clips to their clothes.
People generally are weirdly proud of achievers from their home country, and I say weirdly because it isn’t like they did anything to help. Although personally I find pride in, say, one’s home country’s history pretty weird, because again, it isn’t like you did anything to help, or chose to be born in that particular country. (I suppose a case could be made for justified pride in one’s country as it currently is, since one is helping with that.)
Australia has a habit similar to the US of claiming Australianness for any high achievers who comes too near. In particular, we love to blur the distinction between NZers and Australians, when the NZers do something great. (Like that great “Australian” band Crowded House, or the “Australian” oscar-winning film The Piano which we were all so happy about.)
Mitch, that is perhaps the most long-winded, versed, and eloquent way possible to say “Hey, Norway invented the paper-clip.”. A good read though, and I actually understood most of it, which is a bonus.
Nationalism is certainly something that I have changed my view about over the past few years, first after having lived several years outside of the U.S., and second after having married someone who is not American. Statements that begin with “[Nationality of person making statement] are better because…” just don’t hold water with me like they used to. Perhaps hypocritically I still find myself taking pride in accomplishments of America, (as Matt said, I personally had nothing to do with any of them) but I do find overt displays of patriotism and nationalism somewhat uncomfortable, even embarrasing. And the difference between patriotism and nationalism? Much more blurry to me than it used to be.
Matt, Derek, and Mike thanks for your comments. Mike, I’m glad you weren’t confused by always long-winded writing. Matt, what you mentioned is a very interesting related phenomena “approximate national pride” born of the achievements of neighboring countries. The best example I saw of this personally was at the Winter Olympics at Nagano. I brought some Japanese friends with me to root for the Norwegian skiier in a cross-country competition. They went all out and painted their faces with the Norwegian flag. Next to us were some blue and yellow dressed Swedish fans who were also supporting their own athlete. When it was clear that the Norwegian or the Italian (I can’t even remember who it was, I’m not a big sports guy) was going to win, the Swedes all pulled out Norwegian flags (they came well prepared) and started to yell in support of their neighbor (an unrelated story but I found amusing joke: when one year the Norwegian athletes won 1st, 2nd, and 3rd of some cross country race, with Sweden in 4th, the joke went, “It takes 3 Norwegians to beat one Swede).
Derek, as for your comment on the trouble of defining nationalism vs. patriotism…..<- My answer got really long so I’m posting it as a posting on the blog…