The Politics of Nationalism, Human Development and Global Peace

This paper investigates whether nationalism fosters human development and global peace. Nationalism is a political ideology that strives to unite people to give birth to nations underpinning common identities, including religion, race, culture, or language. Nationalism is based on psychology rather than logic. The core question is whether nationalism gives birth to nations or makes human development. Human development leads to peace. This means that giving birth to nations and the human development of its people are distinct political phenomena. To explain the distinction between two phenomena, the paper distinguishes two kinds of nationalism: negative nationalism and productive nationalism. Negative nationalism embraces the non-cosmopolitan approach, which divides humanity into different nations and creates political hatred among them. Most supporters of negative nationalism humiliate, exploit, discriminate, torture, and exclude people of other nations. This kind of nationalism is inconsistent with human development and global peace. In contrast, productive nationalism is consistent with cosmopolitanism which supports cooperation among people within and outside their states. Productive nationalism promotes self-respect, freedom, dignity, equality, and solidarity in society. Productive nationalism cultivates human development and peaceful co-existence among people. So, this paper repudiates negative nationalism and promotes productive nationalism, which fosters cooperation among people across the world.

This article investigates whether the politics of nationalism fosters human development and global peace.Nationalism is a political ideology that primarily gives birth to nation-states based on particular shared identities, such as religion, race, culture, or language.Empirical evidence shows that nationalism causes conflicts, which leads to violence, terrorism or war.On the one hand, nationalism gives birth to nation-states; on the other hand, it creates hostility in the world.However, Lahouari Addi argues that giving birth to nations and their nation-building are two different social phenomena.Addi contends that the public sphere and civil peace are the essential conditions for nationbuilding.Addi's argument for nation-building is promising.In line with this argument, this paper asserts that the politics of nationalism should make human development and peace in their respective nation-states.To explain malign and benign aspects, the paper differentiates between two kinds of nationalism: negative and productive.Negative nationalism, based on the politics of exclusion, discriminates, humiliates, exploits, and coerces the people of other nations, which causes conflicts and, eventually violence.This strand of nationalism is inconsistent with human development and global peace.Instead, productive nationalism, based on the politics of inclusion, fosters a sense of reverence for humanity which supports self-respect, dignity, freedom, equality, and fraternity in the world.Productive nationalism helps develop human potential, which leads to positive peace through creative accomplishments, such as performing arts, literature, and sports.Thus, the research implies that the politics of productive nationalism creates positive moral values to promote cooperation among people within and across the nations, which fosters human development and peace in the world.In the domain of qualitative research, this paper adopts the methodology of empirically informed philosophical analysis to evaluate the documentary resources.

Introduction
In a collaborated classic work, The Communist Manifesto, Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels declared: "A spectre is haunting Europe-the spectre of communism" (Marx and Engels, 2004, 1).The spectre, that haunted Europe in the first half of the nineteenth century was almost dead in the second half of the twentieth century (Barry, 2002).After the death of communism in Europe, nationalism as a new spectre was born in the second half of the twentieth century, which did not hunt one continent but almost the entire world.Nationalism, thus, becomes a global phenomenon (Tamir, 2019).The rise of nationalism in the contemporary world is an essential and less anticipated phenomenon in world politics (Greenfeld, 2019).Nationalism encounters the contemporary world in different guises, such as religious nationalism, cultural nationalism, racial nationalism, or political nationalism, which cause different kinds of evils, such as global terrorism, violence, and social injustice (Sen, 2006;Gellner, 2008).The political role of nationalism is often questioned in academic and non-academic circles.There is a crucial question of whether the birth of a nation and its development are the same.Giving birth to a nation and its development are two different social phenomena (Addi, 1997).Making a distinction between the two phenomena is significant to understanding how and why nationalism supports peace and human development on one hand and violence and destruction on the other hand.If a nation is developed, it sustains peaceful co-existence and human development.In contrast, if a nation is not developed, it has more inclination to violence and destruction.
In the twentieth century, many nation-states emerged in the world (Hobsbawm, 2021).Lloyd Cox states, " In the first two decades of the Twenty-First Century, then, the nation and nationalism are back with a vengeance" (Cox, 2021, p. 5).Cox is correct because nationalism has become a tool for revenge in the contemporary epoch.One reason for creating a nation is that when people are subject to discrimination, torture, humiliation, and exploitation in society, they want to create a new nation for social justice, human rights, and peace.Yet, these nationstates have not admirably promoted global peace and advanced human development within their countries (Hazony, 2018).The question is how the politics of nationalism could be productive for bringing about the common good.I argue that nationalism is productive if it contributes to human development and creates peace by adopting the ethics of reverence for humanity.In contrast, nationalism is devastating if it causes conflicts, hatred, violence, terrorism, or war in the world.
Although much literature has been produced on nationalism that primarily explains its negative role, there is a need to explore the positive role of nationalism, which could improve human development and create peaceful co-existence in the world.Nevertheless, drawing on Lahouari Addi's dichotomy of birth and nation-building, I distinguish between two types of nationalism: productive and negative.Addi argues that civil peace is vital to a nation.According to Addi, "The nation…is a collection of individuals with a form of political organisation based on a strong sense of participation in the activities of the state.A nation is integrated through institutions that allow participation in the political realm, notably through elections" (Addi, 1997, p. 111).He distinguishes between two kinds of political communities: First, a political community with peace and the public sphere.Second, a political community that uses force rather than peace and the public sphere.The first form of political community is a nation, while the second form, which needs peace and a political sphere, is called nation-in-formation.It is not true that the existence of a pacified political arena ends all conflicts, but it means that there is no use of force for acquiring power.For instance, getting power through a military coup is inconsistent with a pacified political arena (Addi, 1997).I argue that productive nationalism is consistent with the ethics of reverence for humanity, by so doing, it enhances human development and global peace.

Literature Review and Research Methodology
A lot of literature has been created to explain the genesis and ontology of nationalism.I examine significant works to evaluate the two roles of nationalism: productive and negative.According to Isaiah Berlin, 'nationalism' is "something more definite, ideologically important and dangerous" set of ideas which gives a view that people tend to join a particular human group that is different from other groups because they share their particular ways of life, beliefs, memories, arts, language customs, laws, religions and public institutes in a common territory (Berlin, 2013).Although Berlin's explanation of nationalism is broad-spectrum, he mentions that it is 'important' and 'dangerous'.Berlin explains the nature and malign aspects of nationalism.
On the genesis and ontology of nationalism, Benedict Anderson in his significant work, Imagined Communities: Reflections on the Origin and Spread of Nationalism (2006), contends that a nation is to be an imagined community because all people of even a small nation do not know, meet or hear each other but they all imagine to be part of that community (Anderson, 2006).Anderson identifies three salient features of nationalism.First, a nation is to be imagined as limited.The largest nation containing a billion members even has some definite boundaries that distinguish it from other nations.The second feature of a nation is its sovereignty.A nation is imagined to be sovereign because the concept of the nation emerged in the Age of Enlightenment, in which the political legitimacy of the divinely ordained or hierarchical regimes was challenged.This means that a sovereign nation is independent of the traditional dynastic empires (Anderson, 2006).Third, a nation is imagined to be a community.Thus, Anderson maintains that a nation is nothing but an imagined community.Anderson's explanation examines the ontology of nationalism, but he overlooks its malign and benign aspects.Like Andersen, Cox holds that 'nation' is "an imagined community of self-identified people, sharing a common stock of cultural practices, myths and memories that has the object of its demands and aspirations an existing or envisaged state, in a territory identified as a homeland" (Cox, 2021, p. 33).This reveals that Cox's definition of the nation has striking similarities with that of Anderson's.
Lloyd Cox makes a distinction between a broad definition of nationalism with a narrow definition of nationalism.According to Cox, the broad definition of nationalism is "the sum of those beliefs, idioms, and practices, oriented to a territorially delineated nation and embodied in the political demands of a self-identified people, which may or may not be realised in a nationalist movement and state of their own" (Cox, 2021, p. 33).Cox's account of nationalism encompasses a wide range of social modes of life.In contrast, the narrow definition of nationalism refers to an ideology or a wide range of national identifications.Cox's two accounts of nationalism refer to the positive and negative roles of nationalism.
In an important article, The Failure of Third World Nationalism, Lahouari Addi makes a distinction between the birth of a nation and nation-building.To explain nationalism, Addi maintains that many scholars consider cultural and ethnic factors while ignoring political factors.Instead, he argues that political arrangement is the key to a nation (Addi, 1997).By 'political arrangement', Addi means two things: public sphere and civil peace.The public sphere is vital for the development of a nation.Addi writes, "Nationalist ideology gives birth to a nation only if that ideology allows the shaping of a public sphere in which the citizen is perceived under the aspect of his universality and not solely under that of his specific cultural identity" (Addi, 1997, p. 110).A nationalist ideology which creates a vibrant and wider public sphere is essential for building a nation.Yet, after the birth of a nation, its building takes a long process for the creation of a solid political culture.Thus, Addi argues that a public sphere is necessary for the building of a nation.Addi's argument is significant because it shows a distinction between creating a nation and nation-building.This paper advances Addi's argument and explains two kinds of nationalism: productive and negative.This core thesis is that productive nationalism is consistent with human development and peaceful co-existence.
By adopting qualitative research methodology, this paper uses the method of empirically informed philosophical analysis to evaluate the documentary resources comprising books, journals, proceedings of congresses, and conferences on the history, psychology and politics of nationalism.This research is argumentative, analytical and critical.The findings of the research are presented in the form of philosophical arguments.

Explanation of Nationalism
If Anderson's claim is true that a nation is an imagined community, it is essential to understand what is the ontology of this imagined community.Following Anderson's line of argument, I hold that nationalism draws a "bottom-line" at the foundation of a nation which refers to the crucial factors, such as race, culture, religion or language, used to divide humanity into different nation-states.I focus on three central characteristics of nationalism: social metaphysics, historical narcissism and an anti-cosmopolitan approach.First, nationalism constructs a particular social metaphysics for its nation.Every nation has its own sets of ideas, values, habits, myths, symbols, memories or conventions, which take a long time for their construction.I hold that social metaphysics refers to a large stock of ideas, created and practised by people of a particular group.Robert Goodin argues that a 'shared understanding' emerges in a social group because people do not only acquire the same stock of information but they also interpret it in the same way.In general, they share an all-inclusive "way of life" in the sense that they have a common language, history, morals, religion, literature and humour (Goodin, 1997).Like Goodin, Berlin holds that nationalist outlook entails the notion that particular beliefs, policies, goals, and ways of living are ours (Berlin, 2013).Thus, every nation develops its own social metaphysics which directs the collective behaviour of a nation.
Second, nationalism constructs a historical narcissism for one's nation which promotes a sense of belongingness among the members of the nation.Certainly, nationalists glorify their history, cultures and ancestors and undermine others'.Brian Barry points out two significant features of nationalism: First, it explicates the historical developments of a nation.Second, it evaluates contemporary politics embodying 'national character' as a decisive factor in segregating human persons (Barry, 1987).Barry's first claim supports the idea of the historical narcissism of a nation, which eventually affects contemporary nationalist politics by identifying a line of demarcation among people.Due to this narcissistic feature of nationalism, nations sustain their nationalistic ideals.Due to this consciousness, they tend to preserve their cultures, languages, and ancestral modes of education.Some nationalists insist that anyone who comes to their nation-state should adopt their national language, beliefs, values or culture.They may also believe in deporting foreigners from their national homeland (McKim and McMahan, 1997).For instance, people stick to their casts, religions, and races.Berlin holds that the supporters of nationalism sometimes claim that their own nation is superior to other nations; this superiority means that the goals and cultures of their nation are greater than others' (Berlin, 2013).By doing this, they uphold their own nation and criticise other nations.So, in different ways, nationalists construct a historical narcissism for their nations.
Third, nationalism and cosmopolitanism are incompatible.Ernest Gellner describes the contention between nationalism and cosmopolitanism as "a tug of war between reason and passion" (Gellner, 1964, p. 149).If the reason is the foundation of cosmopolitanism, passion is the foundation of nationalism.Cosmopolitanism principally provides rationales for the idea that all human persons to be the part of one human community (Appiah, 2006).One of the central differences between nationalism and cosmopolitanism is the nature of values.Appiah makes two claims which help clarify the distinction between cosmopolitanism and nationalism.First, cosmopolitanism is consistent with pluralism because different people in different societies practise different values (Appiah, 2006).In contrast, nationalist people are monists who stick to particular values.Second, cosmopolitan thinkers are fallibilists who hold that "knowledge is imperfect, provisional, subject to revision in the face of new evidence" (Appiah, 2006, p. 134).Many nationalist thinkers are perfectionists who hold that knowledge is perfect, objective and unchangeable (Appiah, 2006).Thus, cosmopolitan pluralists and fallibilistic standpoints are more useful than nationalists' monist and perfectionist standpoints because the former has the possibility of cooperation with other nations while the latter does not.

Two Kinds of Nationalism
To determine whether nationalism is a boon or a curse, I explain two aspects which I call, productive nationalism and negative nationalism.'Productive nationalism' is a boon that unites people together within borders, while 'negative nationalism' is a curse that divides humanity and creates hatred among nations.Amartya Sen distinguishes two aspects of nationalism.He states, "It would be wrong to see nationalism as either an unmitigated evil or a universal virtue.It can be both a boon and a cursedepending on the circumstances, two sides of the same coin" (Sen, 2008a, p. 39).Sen is right that it is the context that makes nationalism good and bad.Sen adds, "Nationalism tends to be negative when people confront each other along the lines of national divisions; it can be productive when social divisions and hostilities tend to be based on other identities such as religion, community or ethnicity" (Sen, 2008a, p. 39).Sen is correct that the ethical status of nationalism depends upon the circumstances.To illustrate his claim, Sen uses the example of nationalism in Japan which has two faces.According to Sen, the positive face of nationalism encouraged the Japanese to make enormous economic and social developments equal to Europe.Instead, the negative face of nationalism causes conflicts, atrocities, and wars (Sen 2008b).However, I explain the distinction between productive-and negative nationalism, which helps explain why one strand of nationalism supports positive peace, while the other does not.

Negative Nationalism
Negative nationalism divides people based on singular identities and creates hatred among people in a society.Albert Einstein writes, "Nationalism is an infantile disease.It is the measles of mankind" (Einstein, 1929, 117).Like Einstein, Frederick Hayek holds that nationalism is a threat to a free civilization (Hayek, 2013).But, as shown above, productive nationalism can help support and improve states.What Einstein and Hayek are claiming here is only valid of negative nationalism.Negative nationalism is an epidemic and it is the measles of the human race.This kind of nationalism can cause conflicts, hostilities, and violence (Sen, 2008a).Negative nationalism uses violent means to acquire nationalist ends.As Sen writes, "The tactics of suicide bombing and other techniques of super-violence may be new in today's world" (Sen, 2008b, p. 4).He further states, "it is extremely important to remember that the exploitation of the violence in the use of identity-based reasoning has been used for a long time, in many different forms, particularly those based on appeals to nationalism" (Sen, 2008b, p. 4).Consequently, negative nationalism divides people and tends to harm people of other nations.I explain the salient features of negative nationalism.
First, negative nationalism divides humanity into different groups.Sen holds that the division of people based on religion and culture is one of the main reasons for the confrontations in the contemporary social world (Sen, 2006).We can see much evidence of how a religious minority becomes the victim of a religious majority.For a long time, people of different religions lived together in India.Due to religious disparities between Islam and Hinduism, two nation-states, Pakistan and India, emerged in 1947.Pakistan and India have had three wars since 1947, and there is a constant threat of nuclear war between them.Arguably, a nuclear war between India and Pakistan would affect the whole world (Krieger and McCrackien, 2018).This division based on nationalism has worsened the situation in both nation-states regarding human development and peace.According to the Human Development Report 2022, India and Pakistan are placed in medium human development below two categories, very high-and high human development (Conceicao et al., 2022).Muslims in India are subject to victimization by the majority Hindu nationalists.Likewise, non-Muslims in Pakistan are hardly living in a safe haven.
Second, negative nationalism creates enemies.Members of one group are friends with each other while members of other groups are enemies.In the book, Inventing the Enemy (2012), Umberto Eco, an Italian scholar, argues that nationalism primes nations to invent enemies.According to Eco, "Having an enemy is important not only to define our identity but also to provide us with an obstacle against which to measure our system of values and, in seeking to overcome it, to demonstrate our own worth" (Eco, 2012, p. 2).Eco holds that "when there is no enemy, we have to invent one" (Eco, 2012, p. 2).As a matter of strategy, enemies are created to create unity among the members of a nation.In the presence of the enemy, even if it is created, people are gathered together for their own security.Like Eco, Addi states: "If this self-conscious community is living under the domination of cultural or ethnic outsiders, it will rebel by devising a nationalist ideology based upon some combinations of ethnic traditions, language, religion, and the like" (Addi, 1997, p. 113-4).So, if there is an enemy outside, people create a strong sense of solidarity for one another to muster power that can be used for their defence.Like Addi and Eco, Julien Benda writes in his book, The Treason of Intellectuals: "Our age is indeed the age of the 'intellectual organization of political hatreds" (Benda, 1969, 27).This intellectual organisation provides rationales for genocide, terrorism, and violence.
Third, negative nationalism supports a singular identity.This singular identity helps divide people in a society.In contrast, productive nationalism supports multiple identities which creates more diversity in society.There is a detrimental side to identity because "identity can also kill -and kill with abandon" (Sen, 2006, p. 2).The atrocities of Hindu-Muslim riots in the 1940s, during the independence of India and Pakistan, took millions of lives and occurred due to their respective social identities (Sen, 2006).In the phenomena of identity, people are identified with unique identities by others and they are excluded by them.Sen relates an interesting story in the 1920s in Italy about identity affiliation: … [A] political recruiter from the Fascist party trying to persuade a rural socialist that he should join the Fascist Party instead.'How can I', said the rural socialist, 'join the Fascist Party?My father was a socialist.My grandfather was a socialist.I cannot really join the Fascist Party'.The Fascist recruiter is exasperated by such a silly argument, devoid of political logic.'What kind of an argument is this?' he asks.'What would you have done, if your father had been, say, a murderer and your grandfather had been a murderer too?What would you have done then?' 'Ah, then', said the rural socialist, 'then, of course, I would have joined the Fascist Party' (Sen, 2016, p. 7).
Sen's story reveals that people tend to follow their traditional identities.However, there is always an attempt to change other people's identities.Thus, negative nationalism supports singular identities to exclude other people from their group.
Eqbal Ahmad and Amartya Sen agree that language was one of the main reasons for dividing Pakistan and Bangladesh in 1971 (Ahmad, 2000).In East Pakistan, people speak the Bengali language, while in West Pakistan, Urdu is one of the major languages.When the then government declared Urdu as the national language for both parts of the country, East Pakistan did not accept the decision because people did not want to replace Bengali with Urdu.The conflict could not be resolved, and one country was divided into two in 1971.This shows that the formation of nations can be based on different identities.Clifford Geertz only partially agrees with Ahmad and Sen: "The tension between East and West Pakistan involves differences in language and culture too, but the geographic element is of great prominence owing to the territorial discontinuity of the country" (Geertz, 1963, p. 113).Geertz highlights the significance of geographical continuity.However, Sen holds that other than language, culture, and politics aggravated the tension between East Pakistan and West Pakistan (Sen, 2006).
Geertz's idea of the geographical distance makes a sense that the bond between the two parts was not strong enough.
Fourth, negative nationalism supports a totalitarian kind of society.A totalitarian society does not consider the rights of individuals against its own ideology.Orwell's novel Nineteen Eighty-Four explains how a totalitarian society tortures people.Winston Smith, the protagonist of the novel, pronounces: "[T]he Party was in the right.It must be so; how could the immortal, collective brain be mistaken?By what external standard could you check its judgments?Sanity was statistical" (Orwell, 2003, 318).Winston Smith's helpless endorsement shows the politics of a totalitarian mind that attains power by social identity because, for helpless individuals, statistics determine the actual value of an action or judgment.Orwell, perhaps, considered the classical adage, 'might is right'.
The question is why nationalist people act in such a way that we call negative nationalism.This question relates to social psychology, which explains how people act in certain circumstances where they do not act as individuals but as a group mind, mob, or herd.Nationalists hold different psychological passions, such as pride in one's race, colour, or culture (Coleman, 1990).Understanding the psychology of people in groups would help understand negative nationalism.It is often observed that nationalism sometimes results in a kind of collective action, which James S. Coleman, an American sociologist, calls, 'unorganised behaviour'.By 'unorganised behaviour', Coleman refers to an abrupt, sudden, radical, excitable, emotional, or suggestive action that exerts a hypnotic effect on the mob (Coleman, 1990).Coleman's explanation of an unorganised behaviour is relevant to psychology rather than logic.In social psychology or psychological sociology, this unorganised action is often known as crowd or herd behaviour.I explain the salient characteristics of unorganised behaviour.
In The Foundations of Social Theory (1990), Coleman posits three distinctive features of collective behaviour.First, a collective action engages several actors who act together.This postulate shows a social action in which actors conform to each other.Second, actors' conduct changes over time without any sequence.People's conduct does not remain the same but in flux.This feature indicates that people's minds evolve over time.Third, actors are interdependent, which means they are not autonomous in social life (Coleman, 1990).This postulate is more significant to understand group or crowd behaviour.This character of interdependency can be seen in different situations, such as runs on banks for security reasons, panic in theatre because of fire, fads in children in sports, stock rumours, different sorts of riots, and religious frenzies (Coleman, 1990).
To sum up, negative nationalism is a problematic theory because it has several societal implications.Negative nationalism does not support human development.Several studies of social psychology explain that people's rationality does not function normally in crowds.In a crowd, people do not use their own minds while they are under the control of a group mind (Coleman, 1990).If we apply the research of social psychology to groups and nations, this reveals that like groups, in a nation, people's minds are controlled by certain forces.Thus, negative nationalism leads to disorder and violence in society.

Productive Nationalism
The crux thesis of productive nationalism is that it unites people in a nation-state and contributes to creating a political culture where people can develop their human potential to be creative members of a nation.According to Amartya Sen, such a kind of nationalism is a boon because it offers "benefits that are significant and substantial" (Sen, 2008a, p. 40).For instance, human development, peaceful coexistence, and freedom are substantial benefits.I explain four salient features of productive nationalism: First, productive nationalism is a tool against foreign domination, national subjugation, and other injustices, such as exploiting the weak by the powerful and violating human rights.Sen writes that the positive role of nationalism protects not only the victims of foreign domination and other kinds of indignities but all members (Sen, 2008a).For example, in an occupied country, freedom fighters are nationalists who get their country liberated from foreign subjugation.Productive nationalism brings about human rights, basic goods, and the common good to the people of the nation.So, productive nationalism can be a vital force for a nation.
Second, productive nationalism is consistent with multiple social identities.In Identity and Violence: The Illusion of Destiny (2006), Sen maintains that although identity plays a significant role in creating strong relationships with neighbours, colleagues, fellow community members, religious fellows and in many other arenas, that can work as a resource to develop what Robert Putnam calls, "social capital" (Sen,p. 3), it can also exclude other people because of the strong ties with one particular idea.Consequently, "identity can be a source of richness and warmth as well as of violence and terror, and it would make little sense to treat identity as a general evil" (Sen 2006, p. 4).Some accounts of nationalism are based on singular identities, such as a particular language, religion, colour or ethnicity.If a nation holds one particular identity, Sen calls this 'identity affiliation'.For instance, the nationalism of Pakistan is based on the religion of Islam.In contrast, people have several affinities with groups, associations, and alliances through birth in a country.This view that people hold numerous identities is what Sen calls 'identity disregard' (Sen, 2006).The central thesis of 'identity disregard' negates the idea of a singular identity underpinning a nation.A nation based on a singular identity can develop conflicts with other nations more easily.Productive nationalists do not rely on particular identities; they support diverse identities to promote pluralism.
Third, productive nationalism supports cosmopolitanism.To explain how people with nationalist and cosmopolitan attitudes differ from each other, I draw on Rabindranath Tagore's classic novel, The Home and the World.In the novel, Tagore discusses whether one should be loyal to one's own country or the entire humanity.Two male protagonists of the novel, Sandip and Nikhil, support nationalism and cosmopolitanism, respectively.Bimala, the young wife of Nikhil, is influenced by her husband's friend Sandip, who supports nationalism.He is an ardent activist of the Swadeshi movement.This movement, whose main slogan is Bande Mataram (Hail Motherland), supports its own country's goods and rejects foreign goods.Bimala laments her husband's cosmopolitan ideals.Nikhil is a cosmopolitan person.Bimala articulates that she is not worrying that her husband stopped supporting Swadeshi movement.The problem is he does not accept the spirit of Bande Mataram.She states, "'I am willing', he said, 'to serve my country; but my worship I reserve for Right which is far greater than my country.To worship my country as a god is to bring a curse upon it'" (Tagore, 2005, p. 22).Like Diogenes, Nikhil sees himself as a citizen of the world, who does not reject serving his country but also accepts the rights of humanity.For Nikhil, the cause of humanity is more important than the national cause.Consequently, Tagore's argument asserts that wherever one has his home, it is in the world, which means that one should take care of the world while not ignoring his home.Tagore's philosophy supports cosmopolitanism.So, productive nationalism is compatible with cosmopolitanism.
Fourth, productive nationalism helps make the development of a nation in two ways: First, by supporting public reasoning to resolve problems.Addi holds that the existence of a public sphere is vital for nation-building.Addi states that a nation is not a mere collectivity of people but it refers to a pacified political arena (Addi, 1997).According to Addi, a nation may have one of two foundations: On one hand, it is based on a particular ethnicity, culture, and religion.On the other hand, it developed a public sphere, "a realm of universal rights and duties, peaceful political contention, and civic education" (Addi, 1997, p. 115).Addi holds that political participation is essential for the worth of a nation.Thus, nations need peace and a public sphere in which people can participate in the affairs of a state, elections, policymaking, and other political affairs.Second, providing self-respect, dignity, freedom, and equality to people, which help them to develop their potential.Thus, productive nationalism supports rationality, the public sphere, and peaceful coexistence in society.
To conclude, productive nationalism has a benign approach that promotes the ethics of reverence for humanity.Unlike a parochial mind, productive nationalism supports a cosmopolitan outlook.With a cosmopolitan outlook, productive nationalism creates human development by providing an environment where people can develop their human potential.By developing their human potential, people can reshape the social reality, which could be better than the existing one.They can contribute their positive role by creating social reality with their creative minds, such as performing arts, sports, literature, science, and technology.Peace has two forms.Negative peace means the absence of violence, positive peace refers to those conditions which affirm life.In this sense, productive nationalism fosters positive peace.

Nationalism, Human Development and Peace
Deutsch questions the effect of nationalism on the state of the world, asking: "Have the events of the last few decades tended to unify the world, or have they split it more deeply than before?"(Deutsch, 1996, p. 15).Events in the last twelve decades reveal that nationalism did not unify the world but split it.These events include two world wars and the creation of many nation-states in Asia and Africa that have not united but divided the world.Michael Ignatieff states that nationalism primarily provides "rationales for valiant sacrifice, use of violence for supporting one's nation against its enemies" (Ignatieff, 1993, p. 5).Ignatieff is right that nationalism justifies sacrifices for one's nation and the use of violence against other nations.Considering Deutsch's question and Ignatieff's claim, I argue that nationalism (particularly its negative version), human development, and peace are inconsistent.I developed two arguments: The first argument asserts that negative nationalism is inconsistent with human development and global peace because of its parochial outlook.In contrast, a cosmopolitan outlook leads to human development and global peace because it takes people of other nations as human fellows in this shared world.Due to parochialism, negative nationalism produces conflicts, violence, and terrorism.The question is how nationalism mostly becomes a menace to global peace.In Why Nationalism sometimes becomes Nasty (1997), Robert Goodin argues that religion and history help us understand how the nationalist-communitarian approach causes conflicts among nations.Being a member of one nation means that one may not be a member of other nations.Nationalism adopts the policy of exclusion rather than inclusion.This is why nationalism sometimes becomes so nasty (Goodin, 1997).If people do not develop their human potential, can they develop creativity to reshape the world?It is productive nationalism that can create a sense of reverence for humanity worldwide, promoting the moral values of self-respect, freedom, dignity, equality, and fraternity.The productive nationalism, consistent with the ethics of reverence for humanity, unites people to create a human community.
The second argument asserts that productive nationalism supports human identity.Popper argues that certain kinds of intellectuals are responsible for creating cruelty and terror.For the sake of a doctrine, theory, or religion, mass murder is supported by such intellectuals (Popper, 1992).Popper is correct that some intellectuals create certain dividing lines which cause hostility among people.Popper maintains that if intellectuals cause evil, intellectuals can eradicate evil (Popper, 1992).Addi and Popper converge on the idea that public sphere is essential for promoting what is good and eradicating what is bad.The United Nations' Human Development Report 1991 states, "Peace and human development go together…And enhanced human development would help stabilize peace" (HDR, 1991, p. 83).Arguably, human development is consistent with peace.For instance, when people engage in creative activities, including literature, music, dance, science, and technology, they create life-affirming conditions vital for peaceful co-existence.Thus, productive nationalism promotes human development and peaceful coexistence.
To sum up, productive nationalism does not accept any singular identity except human identity.It does not believe in hatred, but in human solidarity, and above all, it promotes cooperation among people.In a social life where people are not discriminated against for their secondary identities, they develop their human potential.When they have the right to freedom and choice to do what they want to do to meet their choices, they become more productive in this social world.Only those people with developed human potential can contribute their role to the betterment of the world.People can construct a better livable place on Earth if they develop their human potential.Thus, productive nationalism fosters both human development and peace in the world.

Conclusion
This article explored whether nationalism is compatible with human development and global peace.The key argument is based on Lahouari Addi's claim that the birth of a nation and its nation-building are two different phenomena (Addi, 1997).Addi's claim asserts that just giving birth to a nation is not enough, it is vital to build it.To advance Addi's argument, I distinguished between two kinds of nationalism: productive and negative.Negative nationalism fosters a sense of detestation for the people of other nations.It produces hatred among people, which leads to conflicts and violence.Instead, productive nationalism not only gives birth to nation-states but also makes human development of their people by fostering the ethics of reverence for humanity based on moral values of self-respect, dignity, freedom, equality, and solidarity.Under these moral values, people can develop their human potential, such as creativity and rationality.Productive nationalism can make a better world by fostering positive peace.When people engage in creative activities, such as music, dance, singing, sports, and literature, they create a kind of positive peace.Thus, the paper defends productive nationalism, which advances human development and global peace and undermines negative nationalism, which causes conflicts and violence.

The Politics of Nationalism, Human Development and Global Peace Saad Malook* 1
1* Lecturer, Department of Philosophy, University of the Punjab, Lahore, Punjab, Pakistan Corresponding author: saad.phil@pu.edu.pk