In the increasingly global world, societies are confronted with challenges of cultural diversity and changing identities. The shared national identity is a controversial topic in debates about social cohesion and democratic participation. This upswing in the discussion between shared identity among citizens as a necessary pre-condition to social unity and good governance has also been brought about by migration, globalization, and multiculturalism. This has profound implications for how scholars and policymakers consider the role that different cultural backgrounds and ideologies will have on national cohesion and political engagement. In this light, debates on the need and the construction of a common national identity continue to characterize debates on citizenship, belonging, and collective identity in diverse societies. Though critics oppose building national identity, it is essential in building social cohesion and belonging, the effective functioning of governance in diverse societies, and the promotion of cultural integration and diversity.
First, a common national identity is central to providing citizens with a sense of belonging and cohesion. Shared identity, based on common values, symbols, and traditions, is the one that nurtures solidarity and cooperation within the fabric of society. As such, when people identify with the collective identity of their nation, this raises their interpersonal relationships and the community’s resilience, hence leading to collective action in challenging times. On the other hand, a cohesive society tends to face and emerge over common challenges, thus enhancing the well-being of its members. Evidence drawn from the works of Miller and Ali (2014) confirms that high-quality national identity covaries positively with social trust. This points to the idea that national identity is essential in promoting unity and cooperation in diverse societies. At the core, common national identity acts as the cohesive force that binds people and makes achieving common goals and aspirations much easier (Miller & Ali, 2014). Common identity increases empowerment whereby citizens can be brought together to work towards shared progress, making society more cohesive and resilient.
Secondly, a common national identity becomes a crucial bridging mechanism towards democratic participation and good societal governance. Empowerment of the people to give them a sense of purpose and belonging encourages all to participate and be involved in political matters, making the democratic process more authentic. Strong national identity, as underlined by Schildkraut (2014), enhances unity where citizens are encouraged to work as a unit with others towards great things. This kind of shared identity helps in consensus-building and decision-making, culminating in better, more coherent, and responsive governance structures (Schildkraut, 2014). Moreover, a united national identity leads to jointly shared responsibilities for the nation’s well-being, increasing the efficiency of the nation’s democratic organs. This would create a sense of belonging and collective responsibility among citizens and eventually lead to effective inclusive governance that considers the needs and views of all the citizens in the decision-making processes.
Essentially, national identity creates an integrated bond that allows all citizens from varied backgrounds to rally towards a common sense of a future vision and hence undertake joint actions towards common objectives. In democratic societies, both citizenship and governance are best framed in the common national identity, the only foundation for active citizenship and unity of governance (Schildkraut, 2014). Such participation has a salutary effect on individuals, inculcating in them a sense of civic pride and responsibility, contributing toward the overall health and vitality of the nation. Hence, a common and inclusive national identity is necessary for developing democracy and attaining societal coherence in a diverse society.
Lastly, a common national identity integrates cultures and makes a nation more diverse. This allows citizens to accommodate and embrace different cultural expressions and identities in the country while simultaneously identifying with a shared set of values and symbols. Therefore, a common national identity is a framework to bring coexistence and respect between the various cultural groups rather than the imposition of homogeneity. It opens up the approaches that, in turn, fortify social cohesion by offering an opportunity to cross the cultural gaps and increasing mutual interaction between the cultures, hence ensuring unity among citizens (Johnson, 2019). Furthermore, a shared national identity enables people of diverse cultural backgrounds to interact based on sharing some citizenship and to transcend diversity. Such an embracing of diversity into a common national framework provides society with the richness of cultural pluralism as a promoter of social cohesion and unity. Such an approach appreciates contributions from various cultural groups and offers space for dialogue, cooperation, and mutual enrichment (Johnson, 2019). At the end of the day, a common national identity based on diversity adds to the texture of society, giving all citizens a sense of belonging and unity with no reference to their cultural origin.
However, critics warn of non-voluntary forms of national identity in relation to democratic principles. Such identity constructs are imposed without the approval of those individuals and would sooner or later erode the vitality and justification of democratic institutions. This erosion of trust decreases political engagement and participation among the citizens. Gabrielsson (2021) underscores the negative impacts of non-voluntarism on formal democracy. His analysis draws out the internal contradiction between the core values of democracy and non-voluntarism. The non-voluntarist membership criteria include and exclude through implying inevitable discrimination between insiders and outsiders, which is incompatible with the principle of intrinsic equality in multi-ethnic states (Gabrielsson, 2021). Nonetheless, for this to work, it would call for pro-activity to encourage democratic pluralism and inclusiveness. Different perspectives through dialogue and interaction would help in countering the ill effects of non-voluntary nation-building ideas. Political education and civic awareness activities would also indirectly influence the citizens in how they actively participate in shaping their common identity and democratic institutions (Gabrielsson, 2021). These societies may try to integrate both divergent poles of national identity and democratic values into a democratic culture, with all its inclusiveness and participation.
National identity is also criticized because the nation’s identity construct is identified with the structurally manipulative nature of political agendas in shaping collective identities. Historically, political elites have always craftily used narratives of national identity strategically to reinforce their ownership and control over populations. In Roselli’s research, Massimo d’Azeglio’s famous statement regarding the necessity to “make Italians” exemplifies this phenomenon, illustrating how political actors seek to impose a sense of unity and loyalty among diverse groups for their own purposes (Roselli, 2018). In addition, Rovelli’s study shows how different historical narratives in cultures add more to the subjectiveness and arbitrariness of national identity. Each society creates its vision of history and heritage based on some important events or persons that would only confirm the sense of collective identity. Such a selective reading of history only works to promote nationalistic feelings further and to nurture loyalty to the state.
However, Rovelli’s argument that nation-building power structures construct national identity misses out on a collective identity case that is organic and in a state of evolution. Political agendas can influence national identities but spring from shared history, cultural heritage, and collective memories. National identities, therefore, provide a framework within which people relate to one another to form a sense of belonging within the larger community (Roselli, 2018). Moreover, using national identity as an instrument of political manipulation fails to embrace the fact that the national identity fosters social cohesion and cooperation of diverse groups. Rather than national identity being seen as threatening, it should be recognized that it might encourage cohesion and cooperation, ensuring that the processes of identity formation are inclusive and flexible.
In summary, this debate on the requirement for and the construction of a shared national identity reflects an inherent tension that cuts across cultural diversity, political power, and social cohesion in the world today. Critics make arguments about the manipulability and toxicity of national identity. However, evidence indicates that identity in common remains fundamentally productive in producing social cohesion, democratic governance, and the amalgamation of cultures in diverse societies. National identity may also emanate naturally from shared experiences and collective memories, disregarding power structures’ voluntary character or influence. Thus, instead of sweeping away national identity, realizing how it can unite people in unity and cooperation is essential as it points to the need for inclusive and adaptive forms of identity construction. Societies can negotiate through the complexities in identity formation by celebrating diversity within a common national framework.
References
Gabrielsson, D. (2021). National identity and democracy: Effects of non‐voluntarism on formal democracy. Nations and Nationalism, 28(2), 501–522. https://doi.org/10.1111/nana.12766
Johnson, D. W., EdD. (2019, September 2). The need for unity not “diversiveness” among citizens. Psychology Today. https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/constructive-controversy/201909/need-national-identity
Miller, D. & Ali, S. (2014). Testing the national identity argument. Political Science Review. Pg 237-259. https://www.academia.edu/11964731/Testing_the_National_Identity_Argument
Rovelli, C. (2018, July 24). National identity is fake. We should focus on the wider common good. The Guardian. https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/jul/24/national-identity-fake-toxic-intolerance-italy-fascism
Schildkraut, D. J. (2014). Boundaries of American Identity: Evolving understandings of “US.” Annual Review of Political Science, 17(1), 441–460. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-polisci-080812-144642
write