In academic papers on nationalism, nations are often defined as represented communities, although from a theoretical point of view other definitions may prevail. Moreover, sometimes this definition leaves the academic field and is used in other spaces. This approach originates from the work Imagined Communities, by politician and historian Benedict Anderson, first published in English in 1983. The work can be found both in Spanish and in French, and in Catalan (it should be noted that many of the classical theoretical works on nationalism can also be read in Catalan and were often published before the Spanish version). Unfortunately, we still cannot read in Basque.

The book presents us with suggestive ideas for understanding nationalism. Among them, and as a sign of the author's training, the focus of the study leaves Europe and throughout many pages focuses its attention on Latin America, as well as Indonesia or the Philippines. Anderson, the author of Marxist training, was one of the most outstanding experts on Indonesia, and this broad vision is evident in his approach (for anyone who wants to delve into it, Under Three Flags, a connection between Manila, Havana and Barcelona). Anderson, for example, reminds us how the origins of the borders of the Latin American states should be sought in the colonialism of Spain and other European countries, more specifically at the internal borders established by the colonizing countries in those territories, than in the former ethnic groups. It also highlights how printing presses and the press played a fundamental role in the process of creating nations, creating autonomous communication spaces, for example. If the nation is an imagined community, it's because we feel a certain relationship with the other citizens we don't know from the front, Anderson tells us.

The terms "imagine" or "imagine" are also used to defend the supposed misleading and even false character of nationalism, regardless of Anderson's work or showing that it has not been read. Thus do some assumptions “world citizens” who do not need nationalism, that is, they are part of the nation(nalism) of the State. On the contrary, the represented does not have to do with the false character, but with the symbolic and cultural fact, because it is already clear that the symbolic and represented reality is fundamental for the human being, as the social sciences have shown.

However, it is more striking to read that it is still used as a “nationalist” insult, not by the citizens of the state, but by some Basques. We have read this recently, perhaps more often than a few years ago. It is legitimate, of course, to use the word in this way, because perhaps nationalism is understood as ideology and, as such, nationalism is somewhat limited and limited, even simple if you like. But if we understand nationalism as the creator of communities represented, on the contrary, then nationalism is a fundamental element in understanding the social reality linked to modernity, although it often appears hidden. This second understanding is more fruitful and its use is essential in a community represented as ours that does not yet have its own state.