Architects of Influence: How Political Leaders Shape National Identity Through Culture
- Andy McGurran
- 2 days ago
- 5 min read
By Andrea McGurran
Published January 6, 2026
Edmonton— National identity is often thought of as an organic expression of people, traditions, and shared history. Yet, behind the scenes, political leaders have long played a pivotal role in shaping how nations see themselves—and how they are seen by the world. By leveraging culture, art, and public policy, leaders craft narratives that influence national identity, sometimes fostering unity and pride, and at other times, exacerbating division.
From the monumental architecture of imperial Rome to the soft power of modern-day K-pop, political leaders have sought to intertwine culture with governance, using it as both a mirror and a mold for national identity. History tells us that the cultural legacies left behind by these "architects of influence" often outlast their political achievements, for better or worse.
Culture as a Political Tool
Culture has always been a battleground for identity. Whether through architecture, language, or the arts, political leaders have recognized its transformative power. When Emperor Augustus declared himself “Father of the Nation” in 27 BCE, he infused Roman identity with ideals of stability, order, and prosperity. Through grand public works such as the Forum of Augustus and the Ara Pacis, he tied his legacy to the very stones of Rome, ensuring that his vision of the Roman Empire would endure long after his reign.
Louis XIV of France used the Palace of Versailles not just as a royal residence but as a symbol of centralized power and French cultural superiority.
Similarly, Louis XIV of France used the Palace of Versailles not just as a royal residence but as a symbol of centralized power and French cultural superiority. “The Sun King understood that culture was inseparable from politics,” wrote historian Lynn Hunt in Politics, Culture, and Class in the French Revolution. “His patronage of the arts and his insistence on courtly rituals at Versailles placed him at the center of French identity.”
In the 20th century, leaders in newly independent nations adopted similar strategies to redefine their cultural identities. After gaining independence from Britain, India’s first prime minister, Jawaharlal Nehru, emphasized the country’s rich artistic traditions and diverse heritage to forge a unifying identity in a deeply divided society. Institutions like the Indian Council for Cultural Relations (ICCR) were established to promote Indian culture abroad, blending ancient traditions with modern aspirations.
Soft Power and the Global Stage
In today’s interconnected world, political leaders often rely on culture as a tool of soft power. Coined by political scientist Joseph Nye, soft power refers to a country’s ability to influence others through attraction rather than coercion. Cultural exports—whether films, music, or literature—play an essential role in this dynamic.
South Korea’s leaders, for instance, have strategically cultivated the “Korean Wave” (Hallyu) to bolster the country’s global reputation. Through government-backed initiatives like the Korean Culture and Information Service (KOCIS) and investments in K-pop, film, and drama, South Korea transformed itself from a war-torn nation into a cultural powerhouse. The global success of Parasite—the first non-English language film to win Best Picture at the Oscars—underscores the effectiveness of this strategy.
“Soft power is only effective when it aligns with credibility,”
China has also invested heavily in soft power, promoting its cultural heritage through Confucius Institutes and films that celebrate its history and achievements. However, critics argue that such efforts are often undermined by the state’s authoritarian image. “Soft power is only effective when it aligns with credibility,” said Nye in a 2013 lecture. “Cultural influence cannot thrive in isolation from political and human rights considerations.”
National Identity in Crisis
While culture can elevate national pride, it can also be weaponized to stoke division or reinforce authoritarian control. Leaders who seek to define national identity often exclude dissenting voices, favoring a version of history that aligns with their political goals.
“The Kremlin has not just rewritten history,” wrote journalist Masha Gessen in The Future Is History, “it has weaponized it, using culture to erase inconvenient truths and rally citizens around a fortress mentality.”
In Vladimir Putin’s Russia, for example, culture has been a central tool for promoting nationalism. Putin has championed the Orthodox Church, commemorated Soviet victories, and censored narratives that challenge his vision of Russian greatness. “The Kremlin has not just rewritten history,” wrote journalist Masha Gessen in The Future Is History, “it has weaponized it, using culture to erase inconvenient truths and rally citizens around a fortress mentality.”
Similarly, in Hungary, Prime Minister Viktor Orbán has used culture to define an exclusionary vision of Hungarian identity. Through control of media and funding for cultural institutions, Orbán has promoted a narrative emphasizing Hungary’s Christian heritage and opposition to immigration. Critics argue that this approach erases Hungary’s multicultural history and alienates minority groups.
"... “1776 Commission” to promote “patriotic education” exemplified how leaders can use culture to shape national identity in ways that reinforce their political base."
Even democracies are not immune to conflicts over cultural identity. In the United States, debates over how to teach American history—particularly the legacies of slavery and indigenous displacement—have become flashpoints in the culture wars. Former President Donald Trump’s creation of the “1776 Commission” to promote “patriotic education” exemplified how leaders can use culture to shape national identity in ways that reinforce their political base.
Rebuilding Identity After Division
Not all efforts to shape national identity are divisive. Leaders facing fractured societies often turn to culture to promote reconciliation and shared values. Nelson Mandela famously used sports as a unifying force in post-apartheid South Africa. By supporting the Springboks rugby team—once a symbol of white supremacy—Mandela fostered a sense of national pride that transcended racial divisions.
“Germany’s commitment to cultural memory has been essential for its democratic rebirth,” said historian Timothy Snyder in an interview with Deutsche Welle.
Similarly, in post-World War II Germany, leaders embraced cultural reckoning as a means of rebuilding national identity. Through memorials like the Berlin Holocaust Memorial and initiatives to teach the horrors of Nazism, Germany sought to confront its past head-on. “Germany’s commitment to cultural memory has been essential for its democratic rebirth,” said historian Timothy Snyder in an interview with Deutsche Welle.
The Future of Cultural Identity
As the world becomes more globalized, the question of national identity grows more complex. Leaders must navigate the tension between preserving unique cultural traditions and embracing diversity in an interconnected world. The rise of populist movements across Europe, the United States, and beyond reflects anxieties about globalization eroding traditional identities.
At the same time, youngish generations are reshaping the discussion around public identity. Movements championing for ethnical justice, indigenous rights, and LGBTQ equivalency are grueling traditional narratives and demanding further inclusive fancies of culture. These shifts raise important questions Who has the right to define public identity? Whose stories are told, and whose are canceled?
As political leaders continue to act as “ engineers of influence, ” their capability to apply culture responsibly will determine not just their patrimonies, but the futures of their nations.
Sources
Lynn Hunt, Politics, Culture, and Class in the French Revolution (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1984).
Joseph Nye, Soft Power: The Means to Success in World Politics (New York: PublicAffairs, 2004).
Masha Gessen, The Future Is History: How Totalitarianism Reclaimed Russia (New York: Riverhead Books, 2017).
Timothy Snyder, “Germany’s Reckoning with the Past,” Deutsche Welle, March 2020.
“Hallyu: The Korean Wave,” Korean Culture and Information Service (KOCIS), Government of South Korea, 2021.
Comments