Patriarchy of the nation-state (original) (raw)

The concept of the nation-state supposedly emerged in the 18 th and 19 th centuries with the downfall of monarchies and the formation of nations or countries based on homogenous or majoritarian linguistic, ethnic, racial or religious identities, that are clear characteristics of patriarchy which stands for the oppression, suppression and repression of a variety of individuals and groups and is not limited to the domination of women alone. These nations began to be governed or ruled by autocrats in some cases and by elected representatives of only some people in others, as that was before the introduction of universal suffrage. Such nations grew in number during the 20 th century with struggles for political independence and sovereignty compelling colonial occupiers to leave the occupied territories in parts of Asia, Africa, South and Central America, the Caribbean et al, completely after transferring power to local leaders. Democracy has been the preferred paradigm of governance of nation-states and that continues until now. However, the so called elected representatives are often drawn from the majority and typically dominant groups or communities and tend to do their utmost to at least hold on to their positions or even elevate themselves, as far as possible. In addition to that, the prolonged and sometimes violent campaigns/ movements for sovereignty usually referred to as " freedom struggles " (although the presumed success or end of these campaigns/movements did not lead to freedom for socioeconomically marginalized groups) had given rise to the idea of nationalism or the more commonly used term, " patriotism " which has become exclusionary and forceful and thus patriarchal. Nationalism is supposed to stand for a sense of pride and love for the native land. Even if it is considered that such a land is the place of birth or citizenship of an individual, it is a sign of patriarchy as it indicates identification with only a specific location. Further, nationalism has regressed into jingoism and xenophobia and resulted in extreme intolerance and violent rejection of those who do not subscribe to the idea of a single or common identity. This is completely patriarchal as it promotes the dominance of the majority and is visible in government and everywhere else, even in a country like India which is socio-culturally very diverse by nature and secular as per the constitution. Therefore, this paper reiterates through various examples how the concept of nation-state is patriarchal and serves the interests of those with a majority mindset and dominant (caste, class, gender, religious, racial, linguistic, ethnic, regional) identity. Further, it questions the very need for a nation-state, especially one that is created by people belonging to a majoritarian socio-cultural identity or group and thought, in a largely homogeneous manner while professing the need to accept diversity. This paper also argues that the contemporary form of nationalism is not only exclusionary but also indicates an attitude of condescension towards minority groups, particularly in a milieu that is inherently heterogeneous.