Nationalism can be defined as a deep sense of loyalty and devotion that one feels for one's own race and country. It is a set of emotions that is nurtured over thousands of
years. And as agrarian communities give way to modern urban societies, nationalism today has also evolved into a form that is quite different from the ancient one that we know of.

　　Nationalism in the old days did not just refer to loyalty to the country. It was closely tied up with loyalty to the emperor or sovereign king. Both were inseparable. Chinese general Yue Fei's undivided loyalty to the country and the Song emperor (who was misled by corrupt court officials) was what led to his tragic death years ago.

　　Empirical evidences also showed that early nationalism had its origin in regional and blood ties. Unless a grouping was assured that the interests of its own families and communities were met, it would be difficult for them to fulfil their duties and obligations to the country. This was why when a new emperor was enthroned, he would confer titles
and territories to his kinsmen. Such feudal practices were also common among regional government officials. The wider sense of patriotism to the emperor and country could only be
stimulated in turbulent times when a country was in danger of invasion by outside forces.

　　This form of early nationalism was suitable for old economies that were basically agrarian in nature, and interdependence and communication links among them were limited. Under these circumstances, rulers resorted to power politics to preserve their territories and their system of government. And power politics went hand in hand with nepotism and cronyism.

　　Actually, it is not difficult to understand why ancient rulers behaved in this manner. In primeval times, tribal chiefs and their members had to resort to power to ensure
the survival of their whole community.

　　Today, however, a different perspective of nationalism has been taken. People can now differentiate between loyalty to the individual ruler and loyalty to the country. They
would not rise to calls for nationalism unless the interests of the ruler and theirs are identical, that is, they truly reflect the interests of the country. To love the country is
to love its citizenry. This is fundamental. Loyalty to the nation and country must take precedence over blood ties and loyalty to an individual or to a community.

　　Unfortunately, social progress does not take place evenly. As a result, the new concept of nationalism also evolves at a different pace. In some societies, people still hold on to the narrow brand of nationalism --- one that is confined to their region. These people place high regard for their immediate families, then relatives, then clans and then regions or religious groups. 　　Examples of these are found in many developing countries, where many of their citizens unscrupulously sacrifice national interests for their own benefits or those of their groups. For these people, loyalty to the country is secondary. They would only npursue national interests or turn to diplomacy when their individual or their group's interests need to be protected.

　　So how do we reinforce the modern concept of nationalism? We need to understand that rights and responsibilities are paradoxes. On one hand, a person needs to be given some political rights before he is able to perform his civic duties. On the other hand, a civic
conscious person will demand rights that are due to him. In time to come, as a society modernises, people's rights and responsibilities should be balanced.

　　Once the majority in a society are able to exert their rights and fulfil their responsibilities, they will regard themselves as masters of their country and their own
destiny. Citizens whose nationalism is built on this foundation are likely to have acquired a high level of modern civic consciousness.

　　Governments of developing countries need to understand this simple principle if they want to conduct education and publicity programmes effectively to promote the new concept
of nationalism among their citizens.

　　Generally, governments find it effective to use the mass media to transmit nationalistic values as they are penetrating and far-reaching. At the same time, governments should, at appropriate times, respond with changes in civic laws and regulations in order to support the new concept of nationalism.

　　In a nutshell, national education should be accompanied by legal changes that would accord its people basic civil rights. Without this guarantee of basic civil and individual
rights, a country's citizens would not be able to say that they are masters of their destiny. Then there is no need to talk about setting up a law-abiding society or even creating a consciousness of the new concept of nationalism.

 

愛(ài)國(guó)主義內(nèi)涵的變遷

　　愛(ài)國(guó)主義是千百年來(lái)形成的對(duì)自己民族國(guó)家的一種深厚的感情。但是，現(xiàn)代社會(huì)和傳統(tǒng)社會(huì)對(duì)愛(ài)國(guó)主義有著不同的要求。

　　首先，傳統(tǒng)意義上的愛(ài)國(guó)是與忠君聯(lián)系在一起的，它把對(duì)君主個(gè)人的忠誠(chéng)與對(duì)國(guó)家的忠誠(chéng)混為一談，不加區(qū)分。這是宋代名將岳飛悲劇發(fā)生的主要原因。

　　其次，在多數(shù)人的行為準(zhǔn)則中，地方的和血緣的忠誠(chéng)強(qiáng)于對(duì)國(guó)家的忠誠(chéng)。只有在確保了自己家族和本地的利益之后，才談得上行使對(duì)國(guó)家的義務(wù)。這是為什么君主登基之后都要大肆進(jìn)行血緣分封，而地方官員也要任人唯親，甚至封建割據(jù)盛行的主要原因。只是在面對(duì)異族入侵時(shí)，傳統(tǒng)意義上的愛(ài)國(guó)情感才能被激發(fā)出來(lái)。

　　傳統(tǒng)愛(ài)國(guó)主義的這種特征在當(dāng)時(shí)的合理性在于，在自然經(jīng)濟(jì)的基礎(chǔ)上，各地的經(jīng)濟(jì)聯(lián)系以及與此相適應(yīng)的交通能力都非常有限，因此強(qiáng)權(quán)政治是統(tǒng)治者維系國(guó)家統(tǒng)治的基本手段，而強(qiáng)權(quán)只能與任人唯親相吻合。

　　這一點(diǎn)，我們還可以從原始氏族首領(lǐng)和其成員的首要任務(wù)和崇高義務(wù)，就是維護(hù)自己血緣氏族的生存利益中一目了然�，F(xiàn)代意義上的愛(ài)國(guó)主義則明確的把對(duì)領(lǐng)袖個(gè)人的忠誠(chéng)和對(duì)“國(guó)家”這一政治共同體
的忠誠(chéng)區(qū)別開(kāi)來(lái)，只有當(dāng)領(lǐng)袖和政府的利益與全體人民的利益相一致時(shí)，當(dāng)他們能夠真正代表“國(guó)家”時(shí)，愛(ài)國(guó)主義才延及他們。

　　因此，愛(ài)國(guó)就是愛(ài)全體人民，這是愛(ài)國(guó)主義的根本所在。在社會(huì)關(guān)系中，它要求對(duì)民族國(guó)家的忠誠(chéng)戰(zhàn)勝人倫的、地方的和血緣的忠誠(chéng)。

　　在轉(zhuǎn)型中的社會(huì)，社會(huì)發(fā)展的不平衡和價(jià)值觀念的沖突使人們的愛(ài)國(guó)主義觀念有很大的不同。一方面，我們可以看到狹隘的地方忠誠(chéng)在人們心目中仍然占據(jù)著重要的地位。很多人的首要義務(wù)是忠于他的
近親，然后擴(kuò)至家族、部族、地域的或宗教集團(tuán)。正如我們?cè)诤芏喟l(fā)展中國(guó)家所看到的，很多人對(duì)以犧牲國(guó)家利益為代價(jià)來(lái)增進(jìn)個(gè)人或小集團(tuán)的利益的行為并不感到內(nèi)疚。

　　反之，卻要受到冷落和歧視。血緣和地方的忠誠(chéng)總是強(qiáng)于對(duì)民族國(guó)家的忠誠(chéng)。他們只有在保護(hù)小集團(tuán)利益的基礎(chǔ)上或與外國(guó)人打交道時(shí)才愿意履行忠于國(guó)家的義務(wù)。

　　那么，如何才能確立現(xiàn)代愛(ài)國(guó)主義的價(jià)值觀呢？我們知道，權(quán)利和義務(wù)是一對(duì)矛盾，人們只有享受到一定的權(quán)利，才會(huì)自覺(jué)地去盡義務(wù)；反之，盡了一定義務(wù)的人，必然會(huì)要求自己應(yīng)該享受的權(quán)利。從
社會(huì)發(fā)展來(lái)看，一個(gè)社會(huì)越是具有現(xiàn)代性，它的公民的權(quán)利和義務(wù)就越是平衡。

　　在此基礎(chǔ)上，當(dāng)一個(gè)社會(huì)中大多數(shù)人的權(quán)利和義務(wù)都得到了基本實(shí)現(xiàn)的時(shí)候，他們就會(huì)把自己看成是國(guó)家和社會(huì)的主人。在這個(gè)基礎(chǔ)上發(fā)展起來(lái)的愛(ài)國(guó)主義是一種自覺(jué)程度很高、現(xiàn)代性很強(qiáng)的思想意識(shí)。

　　反之，在一個(gè)缺乏民主意識(shí)和公民意識(shí)的國(guó)度里，或者說(shuō)，在一個(gè)公民權(quán)利實(shí)現(xiàn)程度很低、只講奉獻(xiàn)的傳統(tǒng)國(guó)度里，很難使人做到用國(guó)家的忠誠(chéng)來(lái)取代個(gè)人的、血緣的和地方的忠誠(chéng)。在很多發(fā)展中國(guó)家，愛(ài)國(guó)主義與其他的基本價(jià)值觀一樣，正處于價(jià)值轉(zhuǎn)換階段，還含有很多傳統(tǒng)的因素，與現(xiàn)代國(guó)家的基本要求有很大的差距。

　　培育現(xiàn)代價(jià)值觀是很多發(fā)展中國(guó)家文化建設(shè)和愛(ài)國(guó)主義教育中必不可少的重要內(nèi)容。只有明確認(rèn)識(shí)到這一點(diǎn)，我們才能主動(dòng)地去培育和宣傳這種現(xiàn)代意識(shí)。

　　具體來(lái)說(shuō)，經(jīng)常、普遍和有效的手段就是通過(guò)各種媒介進(jìn)行傳播。這種傳播可能是無(wú)形的，但其影響力是深遠(yuǎn)的。在此基礎(chǔ)上要適時(shí)的取消和制定相應(yīng)的法規(guī)，以推動(dòng)這種現(xiàn)代價(jià)值觀的發(fā)展。只有在法治的條件下，現(xiàn)代價(jià)值觀才能最終在全社會(huì)得到認(rèn)同。沒(méi)有法制保障人民主權(quán)和個(gè)人權(quán)利的實(shí)現(xiàn)，人民就不會(huì)有當(dāng)家作主的意識(shí)，而沒(méi)有當(dāng)家作主的意識(shí)，法制社會(huì)的建立以及現(xiàn)代愛(ài)國(guó)主義和集體主義從何談起？