Nation and Nationalism in the Thought of Antun Sa’adeh

Yucef Kafrouni

The concepts of nation and nationalism have been widely debated, both by intellectuals and political figures who support them and by those who reject them. Factors such as land, origin, customs and traditions, language, religion, culture, economy, history, and collective will are often considered key components of a nation. Sometimes, emphasis is placed on one or a few specific elements to define a nation.

Boyd Shafer, in his extensive study on the emergence of nationalisms, states that “national feeling, in the sense of loyalty to the nation, did not spread widely and become a popular movement in Western Europe until around the end of the eighteenth century during the era of the French Revolution. It did not become an acute and effective feeling of loyalty to the national group and the national state relative to most people except during the first half of the twentieth century.”

Initially, Marxism linked the rise of nationalism to the emergence of the bourgeois class and its market control ambitions. Others have connected nationalism to language (Fichte), race (Gobineau and Chamberlain), common will (Renan), or political, geographical, or cultural factors. Gustave Le Bon suggested that “behind the character of every nation is the constant spirit of race that drives its destiny.”

Indeed, many myths, legends, and misconceptions are intertwined with nationalistic concepts. The ideas of nation and nationalism emerged in the West imbued with extremism, racism, arrogance, and chauvinism. As Boyd Shafer explains, “Thinkers in each major European group were telling citizens that they had the right to consider themselves God’s chosen people.”

Nassif Nassar’s important book “Perceptions of the Contemporary Nation” provides an analytical study of national concepts in modern Arab thought. He categorizes these definitions into four major groups: religious perceptions, linguistic perceptions, regional perceptions, and political perceptions.

Antun Sa’adeh believes that "the nation is a purely social reality," and he considers clarifying social realities and facts to be straightforward. He asks: What is the reason for the conflict and contradiction in theories about the concept of the nation? Sa’adeh answers: "The reason for this is that the nation contains an essential, even vital, element – the political element. Discussions about nations are almost always tinged with fanaticism, patriotism, or political motives. The conflict of theories among different nations extends to conflicts within a single nation, due to internal classes and groups, each with their ambitions and interests."

Our analysis of Sa’adeh’s thoughts on nation and nationalism is based on his extensive writings, particularly his 1938 book The Rise of Nations, which examines the rise and definitions of nations. Throughout his various works, Sa’adeh explores these concepts from both theoretical perspectives and specific views on the Syrian nation, amid intellectual and political debates with proponents of “Lebanese nationalism,” “Arab nationalism,” and the “religious state.”

Nassif Nassar notes, "In modern Arab thought, we do not find an author or activist who gave as much extensive and comprehensive theoretical attention to the concept of the nation before Sa’adeh."

Antun Sa’adeh (1904-1949) approached the concepts of nation and nationalism on two methodological levels:

The first level is specific and arises from the reality of "his nation."

The second level is general, based on precise scientific studies to understand society's foundations, development, and factors contributing to the emergence of nations.

Sa’adeh asserts: "The Rise of Nations is a purely social and scientific book in which I avoided interpretations, theoretical conclusions, and other branches of philosophy whenever possible. I grounded its facts in reliable sources. I aimed to uncover the latest technical facts that illuminate social manifestations from within and prevent arbitrary judgments."

There is no doubt that the general methodological level is interconnected with the specific methodological level.

Antun Sa’adeh, a native of Dhour al-Shweir in Mount Lebanon, identified himself as a Syrian. This sentiment was common among all residents of the Levant, transcending sectarian differences. Historians, writers, and poets often expressed this feeling spontaneously. Only many years after the modern political entities formed due to the division of natural Syria under the 1916 Sykes-Picot Agreement did this sentiment begin to decline.

In a letter from Raml Prison dated December 10, 1935, to lawyer Hamid Franjieh, Sa’adeh wrote: “I was a child when the Great War broke out in 1914, but I had already begun to perceive and understand. The first thing that struck my mind was witnessing and feeling my people's suffering. I continually asked myself, ‘What has brought this woe upon my people?’ In 1920, as sectarian hatreds resurfaced and the nation hadn’t yet buried their remnants, it became clear that I wasn't seeking answers merely for scientific knowledge. I wanted to find effective means to eliminate our woes. After initial studies, I concluded that the loss of national sovereignty was at the root of our problems. This marked the start of an era focused on studying national issues, group dynamics, and social rights. Over time, the significance and complexity of what defines a nation grew clearer to me.”

In his research titled “The Meaning and Characteristics of the Nation,” published in al-Majalla magazine in Beirut in March 1933, Sa’adeh explains: “The linguistic meaning of the Arabic word 'nation' is not sufficient. The racial ambiguity associated with the term 'nation,' derived from the Latin word 'natio,' meaning birth or offspring, needs clarification. In dictionaries, the term nation refers to a group of people regardless of birth or lineage.”

Defining a nation, Sa’adeh says: “A nation consists of people living with unified interests, a shared destiny, and cohesive psychological and material factors in a specific country. Their interaction within this context over time gives them unique characteristics distinguishing them from other groups.”

Sa’adeh evaluates human existence based on factual reality, avoiding metaphysical interpretations that contradict observable truths. He states: “When discovering laws, we must remember to derive them from life itself, ensuring they do not conflict with natural processes. Discovering one or two laws doesn't mean ignoring other aspects of natural reality.”

Sa’adeh emphasizes a dynamic interaction between humans and their environment, noting that humans uniquely establish this relationship with nature: “The earth influences Man, who in turn adapts and modifies the earth. However, regional environments determine the extent and forms of this adaptation.”

Human thought enabled an interactive relationship with the environment. According to Sa’adeh, modern civilization results from continuous interaction between humans and their surroundings.

The concept of a nation is historically constructed. Sa’adeh describes it as “formed over time by human thought, feeling, and will.” He questions whether humanity will ever become one unified society.

He further asserts: “A nation is primarily a social unit or natural community. Its defining elements evolve from its life and history. Nations may undergo changes in religion, literature, customs, traditions, and culture without compromising their essence. Nations will continue to exist until all barriers are removed and humanity becomes one social unit.”