Liberalism and nationalism

American Revolution and Republicanism

The American Revolution (1775–1783) is often cited as one of the earliest modern syntheses of liberalism and nationalism. It was rooted in Enlightenment principles of natural rights, popular sovereignty, and the social contract. Unlike many later European nationalisms based on ethnicity, American nationalism was primarily civic, defined by adherence to a common set of liberal political principles and the United States Constitution. The revolutionary leaders, such as Thomas Jefferson and James Madison, argued that the legitimacy of the new nation rested not on a shared ancestry, but on the protection of individual liberties.

19th-century European origins and the "Spring of Nations"

In the early 19th century, liberalism and nationalism were fundamentally "twin ideologies" born from the Enlightenment and the French Revolution. Both opposed the absolute monarchies and the dynastic legitimacy established by the Congress of Vienna (1815). Liberals sought individual rights and constitutional government, while nationalists sought self-determination and the creation of nation-states based on the "sovereignty of the people."^[3]

This alliance reached its peak during the Revolutions of 1848, often called the "Spring of Nations." In Germany, Italy, and the Austrian Empire, movements combined demands for a liberal constitution with national unification or independence. However, after the failure of these revolutions, "National Liberalism" in Europe began to drift toward the right, often prioritizing national strength and unification (as seen in Bismarck's Germany) over radical individual liberties.^[5]

Latin American Republicanism and Independence

Outside Europe, the synthesis of liberalism and nationalism was central to the independence movements in Latin America. Leaders like Simón Bolívar were deeply influenced by liberal constitutionalism but adapted it to the needs of national liberation from Spanish colonial rule. This "Creole liberalism" sought to establish independent republics based on legal equality and free trade, though it often struggled with the tension between liberal ideals and the need for a strong, centralized state to maintain national unity.^[6]

The "Wilsonian Moment" and National Self-determination

Following World War I, the synthesis of liberalism and nationalism underwent a global transformation through the advocacy of U.S. President Woodrow Wilson. In his Fourteen Points, Wilson popularized the principle of "national self-determination," which applied liberal concepts of individual consent to the collective level of the nation. For Wilson, a stable international order—guaranteed by a League of Nations—required a world of sovereign nation-states governed by constitutional and democratic principles.^[7]

While Wilson's primary focus was the reorganization of defunct European empires (such as the Austro-Hungarian Empire), his rhetoric sparked what historian Erez Manela terms the "Wilsonian Moment" in the colonial world. Proponents of liberal nationalism in Asia and Africa—such as those involved in the March 1st Movement in Korea and the 1919 Egyptian Revolution—interpreted self-determination as a liberal mandate for independence from imperial rule. However, the failure of the Paris Peace Conference to apply these principles outside Europe led many non-Western nationalists to eventually abandon Wilsonian liberalism in favor of more radical or authoritarian ideologies.^[8]

Modern Era

Following World War II and the subsequent era of decolonization, the synthesis of liberalism and nationalism saw a theoretical and practical revival. In the late 20th century, scholars like Yael Tamir and David Miller sought to rehabilitate the concept, arguing that a shared national identity is essential for sustaining the welfare state and liberal democratic solidarity. This "liberal nationalism" emphasizes that individual autonomy is best realized within a stable national community that provides a "context of choice."^[4]

Since the 2010s, the Hong Kong nationalist movement has emerged as the "localist camp".^[9] Hong Kong nationalism is often characterized as a liberal-nationalist ideology; according to Gary Tang, the views within the movement are closer to liberal culturalism than civic nationalism, arguing that the state (or the political community) should provide the necessary cultural conditions for individuals to lead a good life.^[10]

Liberal ethnic nationalism

Not all liberal nationalism is always civic nationalism; there are also liberals who advocate moderate nationalism that affirm ethnic identity, also referred to as "liberal ethnonationalism".^[11] Xenophobic movements in long-established Western European states indeed often took a 'civic national' form, rejecting a given group's ability to assimilate with the nation due to its belonging to a cross-border community (ex. Irish Catholics in Britain, Ashkenazi Jews in France).^[12][13] On the other hand, while liberal subnational separatist movements were commonly associated with ethnic nationalism; such nationalists as the Corsican Republic, United Irishmen, Breton Federalist League or Catalan Republican Party could combine a rejection of the unitary civic-national state with a belief in liberal universalism.^[14][15]

Mosaddeghism

The most significant mid-20th-century example of liberal nationalism outside the West was Mosaddeghism in Iran. Led by Mohammad Mosaddegh and the National Front, this movement was characterized by a commitment to parliamentary democracy, the rule of law, and national sovereignty—most notably expressed through the nationalization of the Iranian oil industry in 1951. Unlike later authoritarian nationalist movements in the region, Mosaddeghism sought to achieve national independence through liberal democratic institutions rather than military dictatorship. Mosaddegh argued that true national freedom was impossible without political liberty and domestic constitutional reform. The 1953 coup that overthrew Mosaddegh is often cited as a turning point where the synthesis of liberalism and nationalism in the Middle East was forcibly disrupted by Cold War geopolitics.^[17][18] However, some critics point out that Mossadehism, by placing too much emphasis on fighting foreigners (especially the challenge to the West) and xenophobia to achieve the goals of economic and political independence, has effectively marginalized more important areas such as political and social freedoms in Iran.^[19][20]

National liberalism

National liberalism is a variant of liberalism, combining liberal policies and issues with elements of nationalism.^[21] However, national liberalism generally refers to right-wing or conservative liberalism, and nationalist left-liberalism is not usually referred to as national liberalism.^[22][23][24]

Trudeauism

Trudeauism is a Canadian liberal ideology related to the political philosophy of former Liberal Party of Canada leader and Canadian Prime Minister Pierre Elliott Trudeau, and pursues Canadian nationalism based on liberal socialism, multiculturalism, social justice, and centralist politics.

Venizelism

Venizelism is a liberal, republican, and Greek nationalist political movement and ideology based on the political beliefs and policies of prominent Greek politician Eleftherios Venizelos in the early 20th century.