 types of nationalism. In this session we are going to discuss the types of nationalism and these are normally divided into three categories and based on their definitions like the nations and their membership and these types are examined by specifically by Greenfield and Eastport and their contribution is really remarkable. So the first type of nationalism that is individualistic and civic type of nationalism. This type of nationalism defines the nation in composite terms as an association of individuals that association of individual basically deals with the concept of nation people as in we the people and the criteria of membership are civic nationality being equated with citizenship. So we can say that in this category individualistic and civic type that like we are all Pakistani citizens but the basic link that is developed with Pakistan is that we are present in our region but when we play our role as citizens that civic sense that responsibility that is the key line so the collective and civic type of nationalism in this case a unitary definition of the nation as in that we whole are basically the members of an organization and when we talk about the organization then actually we are the members under certain responsibilities. We are the citizens of Pakistan but when we call ourselves the citizens of Pakistan we have some responsibilities and of course we have some rights within it. Then there is one in which we are collective but also we have some ethnic loyalties. Normally the third category of nationalism falls under that combines a unitary definition of the nation with ethnic when we say or we use the term of ethnic then actually we are going to discuss that being at the larger level we are the citizens of Pakistan that is our state but still under that state there are various groups like we know that some groups they tell their identity because of their language, they keep their identity because of a specific area and they feel proud of it, that is, even when it comes to a collectiveness, it is important to talk about your ethnic identity or promote it and in any democratic state these things are present in them. So we can say that in the modern states where citizens are firstly, they are the citizen of that concerned state where they have some rights, they believe in a constitution, there they have some duties which they perform under the law of the state. But along with that, in the modern state system who are feeling with their group or for their identity, some groups become more active, then they sometimes create challenges for that state system but in some cases these groups keep their identity but under the constitution of the state that is, if they feel that they have some rights which the state may not be able to give properly but for the rights that they want to struggle for their identity and for the entity, they are not within the boundaries of the constitution. That is, the state's integrity or the unity of the state does not threaten them, they do not want to threaten them, they do not problem the state's unity but for their group, for their people who are the believers of the feeling of nationalism, they try to have some rights, they they try to have some place in the system and this is normally where people have problems that if the political system does not properly deliver their rights or in the political system, economic opportunities are lesser, that is, if a particular group feels economically that the part of the people in the system is not in terms of the environment, then there are groups that become a little more active, many times we have seen that in today's era, even in the 20th century, from some groups, the government is threatened or sometimes we see the protests, this is different from the world, it is also within the liberal democracies and in the case of Pakistan, these things are practiced, you can see that in the name of nationalism or in the name of a specific group, sometimes groups try to raise their voices for their political rights or sometimes for their economic rights but it is quite natural that when people have their priorities, when people have their affiliations with some specific identity, they can raise the voice but the most important check on this is that this voice or this identity or this protest should never threaten the state's integrity, in such cases then state try to use or exercise the power of authority to snub such type of voices, so even on the international level, the feeling of nationalism is a positive voice until the group creates a threat for the state's integrity, but if such a situation occurs and the group comes to violence or to protest, then in that situation the state has the authority to tackle the situation and the various strategies exercise them and operate them so that they can control the anti-state feelings