The same story repeats itself every day with a new character at the departure gate of Tribhuvan International Airport. Parents or relatives who have gone to drop off their children wave and say, ‘Come back soon.’ But, everyone knows that ‘soon’ can sometimes turn into a long wait for years.

The plane takes off, the mountains disappear into the clouds, the mountains become smaller, and when viewed from the window, Nepal gradually becomes a dot. With the plane, Nepal does not move away from the mind of the foreigner, but rather begins to dwell deeper in the mind. Distance has its own sociology, it narrows geography. However, it makes relationships, memories, and belonging even larger, and nationalism swings to a different address. This article will discuss the new address that nationalism is bringing.

The old geography of nationalism

For years, we have tried to understand the scene of the departure hall mainly through economic and political language. Economists called it ‘labour migration’, the government worried about ‘brain drain’, newspapers saw the crisis of ‘youth exodus’ and development scholars debated ‘remittances, demographic change and the loss of skilled manpower’. All of these see primarily the movement of people, not the transformation of society. What has changed in Nepal today is not just where people live, but where they see their future, where they construct their identity and where they give meaning to their relationship with the ‘nation’. In this sense, the definition of nationalism linked to migration is not just a transfer of population, it is also a restructuring of the way the nation is imagined.

Benedict Anderson’s ‘Imagined Communities’ is considered a fundamental work in understanding modern nationalism. According to Anderson, a nation is not a natural or biological community – it is an ‘imagined community’ created by a shared imagination, a shared memory and shared political relations. Later, Partha Chatterjee questioned this concept and put forward the debate ‘Who Imagines Communities?’ and argued that in post-colonial society, the idea of ​​a nation is formed through a different historical process than the European experience. However, the experience of contemporary Nepal is urging us to add another question to these debates. The question is no longer just ‘Who imagines a nation?’ but also ‘Where is a nation imagined from?’ Because today, millions of Nepalis are imagining, experiencing and bringing the nation to life not only within the geography of Nepal but also from Sydney, Tokyo, Doha, Toronto or London. In this sense, the current experience of Nepal compels us to think in a new way about the changing address of nationalism.

The real question of Nepal is not just why millions of young people have left for abroad. The real question is - how do we understand that nation when the dreams, aspirations, investments, and emotional ties of a nation begin to be built beyond its own borders? Where does the center of nationalism lie? The traditional concept of nationalism has long accepted a basic assumption as a natural truth – the center of a nation lies within its own geography. With the creation of the modern nation-state, the nation was imagined as a fixed border, a common territory and a single political community. The idea that citizens live there, participate in their institutions, build their economy there, and imagine a common future there became the backbone of modern nationalism. Therefore, patriotism was also linked to geography. The belief was established that loving one's nation meant living there, working there, building a future there, and, if necessary, defending it there. The national flag, national anthem, national history, national day, and many public symbols of the state kept repeating this message - the real life of a nation takes place within its borders, and the relationship of citizens with the nation is also defined by their physical presence.

Nepal also accepted this geocentric fantasy of modern nationalism almost unquestioningly. For many decades, the most natural expression of patriotism was considered to be living in one's own land, working in one's own society, and building the future of one's own country. The ideal citizen was someone who studied in Nepal, made a living in Nepal, raised a family here, and contributed to nation-building while living here. Going abroad was not a symbol of success—it was considered a compulsion imposed by poverty, conflict, or limited opportunities. Therefore, migration was not considered a permanent settlement, but only a temporary journey. The belief that Nepal was the ultimate home to return to was deeply rooted in society. Those who had gone abroad were expected to return one day and invest their knowledge, skills, experience, and capital in the development of the country. Since the basis of the relationship with the nation was considered to be geographical presence, the idea that one could maintain the same deep connection with the nation while living outside the country was almost unthinkable at that time.

The new geography of nationalism

However, today's Nepal is slowly and decisively challenging this geocentric concept of nationalism. In the empty tea shops of the village, the topic of discussion is now abroad rather than farming, local development or village politics. 'So-and-so went to Australia', 'So-and-so went to Japan', 'So-and-so went to Canada', 'The son is preparing to go to Korea', 'The daughter's visa has arrived' - such sentences have now become the most common social language of Nepali village life. Once abroad was an exception, today it has become a new geography of aspirations. Abroad is no longer just a destination, it has become synonymous with the future.

Until a long time ago, the question parents would ask their children was, 'What do you want to be when you grow up?' This question imagined the future through a profession - teacher, engineer, doctor, researcher, entrepreneur or civil servant. But, today that question has gradually changed. Now, in many homes, the first question is, ‘Which country are you thinking of going to?’ On the surface, it may seem like just a change in words. However, in reality, this is a sign that the aspirations of Nepali society have changed. Earlier, the future was defined by profession, today it is determined by destination. Once, the question ‘What will I become?’ determined the direction of life, today the question ‘Where will I go?’ is replacing it. As a result, many Nepali youth are forced to decide where to spend their lives before deciding what their identity will be.

This seemingly small change actually indicates the most profound transformation of contemporary Nepali society. Going abroad is no longer just an economic strategy to escape unemployment, low income, or limited opportunities – it has become a powerful social institution in Nepali society. It is redefining youth aspirations, educational choices, family investments, marriage decisions, social standing, and even the criteria for success.

Today, thousands of young people spend years preparing for language classes, IELTS or Japanese-Korean language tests, education consulting firms, visa processes, and interviews long before they enter the labor market. For many families, the ultimate goal of investing in education is no longer just acquiring knowledge, it is an investment in international mobility. Education itself is becoming less of an end goal and more of a means to go abroad. As a result, the meaning of educational achievement is also changing. A degree is now taking the form of a certificate that opens the door to international opportunities rather than a preparation for contributing to the Nepali economy. In this sense, in today's Nepal, education, skills, and professions are not the final destination in themselves - they have become 'transit' on a journey to reach abroad. Youth are preparing to change geography, not to build their careers first. In this situation, the change has occurred not only in the economy, but also in the collective imagination of society.

This transformation is also silently rearranging the criteria for success and the structure of social prestige in Nepali society. Today, in many communities, reaching abroad has become not only an economic achievement, but also one of the strongest symbols of social success. The news of a young person getting a visa sometimes creates more excitement and pride than excellent academic achievements. Today, in many families, the news of reaching Australia, Canada, Japan or the United States is proudly shared. It is not uncommon for young people who are abroad or have the potential to go abroad to be given priority in marriage negotiations. On the contrary, young people who want to build a future in Nepal often have to face another question, ‘Are you still here? Do you have any plans to go abroad?’ These questions are not curiosity, but reflect the changing value system of society.

Immigration has become so common that going abroad is considered a natural path to progress, while the decision to stay in one's own country has become a matter of self-explanation. Thus, the meaning of success has gradually begun to be determined not by profession, but by geography. Thus, even the social language of success has changed in Nepali society. Earlier, prestige was defined by profession, but today it is determined by destination. Where a person is is becoming more meaningful than what he does. The measurement of success has gradually shifted from qualifications, skills or contributions to geography. In fact, success has also created its own geography in contemporary Nepal.

These changes convey the stereotypical meanings of 'brain drain', 'labor migration' or 'youth exodus', and show the movement of people. However, they cannot capture the profound changes that have taken place in the collective imagination of Nepali society. Nepal is no longer just exporting labor – it is also sending the generation that will build its future abroad. In a context where the country is sending its aspirations, possibilities and dreams across the border, the taunt given to parents by children from abroad during this year’s elections, saying, “If you don’t vote for so-and-so, I won’t send money,” was the aspiration for a change in the country.

Today, Nepal’s future is not imagined only in Kathmandu, Pokhara or Biratnagar – it is being imagined equally deeply in the classrooms of universities in Sydney, in language schools in Tokyo, on construction sites in Doha, in stadiums where the World Cup is being held, in hospitals in Toronto and in universities and workplaces in Europe and North America. Where Nepal’s political borders end, the imagination of Nepali society does not end. On the contrary, its new geography begins there. Nationalism has found a new address.

However, our public debate is still entangled in the old vocabulary. The real question facing Nepal today is not just why millions of youth have emigrated. The real question is – how do we understand a nation when its dreams, aspirations, investments and emotional ties start to be built beyond its own borders? Where is the future of the nation being written? And, where does the center of nationalism reside?

To find the answer to these questions, we must reconsider the old belief that nationalism has a fixed geographical address. Contemporary Nepal is telling us a different story. The nation has not disappeared from the lives of its citizens, nor has love for the nation weakened. What has changed is the place where that love is expressed, the geography where that relationship is built, and the vision for imagining Nepal. Therefore, to understand today's Nepal, it is not enough to look for nationalism within borders, maps and geography alone. We must learn to look within that distance as well, where Nepalis living thousands of kilometers away are still connecting their future, identity and country with a single emotional thread.

राज्यले हेरिरहेको पुरानो नक्सा
आजको नेपालको सबैभन्दा ठूलो विडम्बना यही हो– समाज धेरै अगाडि बढिसकेको छ तर राज्य अझै पुरानै नक्सामा राष्ट्रवाद खोजिरहेको छ । नेपाली समाजले आफ्ना आर्थिक सम्बन्ध, पारिवारिक जीवन, सामाजिक सञ्जाल, सांस्कृतिक अभ्यास र राजनीतिक चासोलाई सीमापार फैलाइसकेको छ । तर, राज्यको राष्ट्रवाद अझै सिमाना, नक्सा, झन्डा र नाराभित्रै सीमित छ । समस्या यी प्रतीकको महत्त्वमा होइन, समस्या यति मात्रै हो कि आजको समाजलाई ती प्रतीकले मात्रै व्याख्या गर्न सक्दैनन् ।

राज्यले विदेश गएका नेपालीलाई प्रायः दुई रूपमै देख्छ– रेमिट्यान्स पठाउने श्रमिक वा फर्किनुपर्ने नागरिक । तर, उनीहरू यति मात्रै होइनन्– नेपालका नयाँ राजनीतिक, आर्थिक र सांस्कृतिक पात्र पनि हुन् । उनीहरूले विदेशबाट नेपालको चुनाव नियालिरहेका छन्, सामाजिक सञ्जालमार्फत सार्वजनिक बहसमा हस्तक्षेप गरिरहेका छन्, प्राकृतिक विपत्तिमा सबैभन्दा पहिले सहयोग जुटाइरहेका छन्, आफ्ना गाउँमा विद्यालय, पुस्तकालय र स्वास्थ्य संस्थामा लगानी गरिरहेका छन् । उनीहरू भौगोलिक रूपमा बाहिर भए पनि नेपालको सामाजिक जीवनभित्रै छन् । उनीहरू सीमापार बसेका नागरिक मात्रै होइनन्, सीमापार बसेको नेपाल पनि हुन्।

त्यसैले प्रश्न अब केवल ‘युवा किन विदेशिए ?’ होइन । त्यो प्रश्न धेरै पटक सोधिसकियो । आजको गम्भीर प्रश्न अर्कै छ– राष्ट्रले नागरिकलाई कहाँ भेट्छ ? केवल सीमाभित्र, कि सीमापार पनि ? यदि लाखौं नेपालीको दैनिकी, श्रम, लगानी, सम्झना र भविष्य सीमापार फैलिएको छ भने के राष्ट्रको कल्पना पनि त्यही अनुपातमा विस्तार हुनु पर्दैन ? राज्यले अझै भूगोललाई स्थिर मानेर राष्ट्रलाई बुझिरहेको छ, जबकि समाजले धेरैअघि नै राष्ट्रलाई गतिशील बनाइसकेको छ ।

त्यसैले आजको नेपालको विभिन्न संकट आप्रवासनको कारण मात्रै होइन, राष्ट्रवादको परम्परागत विचारले पनि हो । हामीले राष्ट्रलाई नागरिकको बसोबाससँग जोडेर बुझ्यौं तर नागरिकहरू राष्ट्रलाई आफ्नो सम्बन्धसँग जोडेर बाँचिरहेका छन् । एउटा नेपाली सिड्नीमा बस्न सक्छ, कर अस्ट्रेलियालाई तिर्न सक्छ तर आफ्ना आमाबुबाको उपचार, गाउँको विद्यालय, स्थानीय निर्वाचन र नेपालको भविष्यप्रति उसको चिन्ता उत्तिकै जीवित हुन सक्छ । राष्ट्रसँगको सम्बन्ध अब केवल भौतिक उपस्थितिले निर्धारण गर्दैन– त्यसलाई स्मृति, उत्तरदायित्व, भावनात्मक लगाव र निरन्तरको संलग्नताले पनि निर्माण गर्छ ।

यसको अर्थ युवा पलायनलाई सामान्य ठान्नुपर्छ भन्ने होइन । बरु यसको अर्थ ठीक उल्टो हो । यदि एउटा समाजमा आफ्नै देशमा बस्नुभन्दा विदेशिनु बढी तर्कसंगत निर्णय बन्न थाल्छ भने त्यो युवाको असफलता होइन, राज्यको असफलता हो । राष्ट्रवादको रक्षा केवल सीमा सुरक्षाले गर्दैन, त्यसका लागि त्यस्तो समाज निर्माण गर्नुपर्छ, जहाँ नागरिकले आफ्नो भविष्य देशभित्रै कल्पना गर्न सकून् । देशप्रेम छोटामीठा भाषणले उत्पन्न हुँदैन– त्यसलाई न्यायपूर्ण संस्था, विश्वसनीय शासन, सम्मानजनक रोजगारी र भविष्यप्रतिको आशाले टिकाइराख्छ ।

त्यसैले आजको नेपालको सबैभन्दा ठूलो चुनौती राष्ट्रवादलाई पुनःपरिभाषित गर्नु हो । यदि बेनेडिक्ट एन्डरसनले राष्ट्रलाई ‘कल्पित समुदाय’ भनेका थिए भने, आजको नेपालले त्यो कल्पनाको भूगोल बदलिएको देखाइरहेको छ । नेपाल अब केवल आफ्नो नक्साभित्र बस्ने मानिसहरूको साझा समुदाय मात्रै होइन– संसारैभर छरिएका नेपालीको पनि साझा सामाजिक संसार हो । नेपालको राजनीतिक सिमाना जहाँ समाप्त हुन्छ, नेपालको सामाजिक जीवन त्यहाँ समाप्त हुँदैन ।