Nationalism is a particular and universal project at the same time. While it encourages individuals to see themselves as members of a particular community, nationalism in itself exposes the common formulations and vocabularies among different national experiences and narratives. This is a sort of dilemma of nationalism that produces a question of translation. And different translations lead to different understandings of the nature of nationalism. This essay asks whether the relevant Korean term for nation is Minjok or Kukmin, and how we can estimate the power and endurance of nationalism. First, although Korean Minjok which implies strong ethnic and cultural communalities in a dictionary sense seems to be similar to ethnie rather than nation, Minjok is very close to nation in a specific Korean context. Meanwhile, nation is very close to Minjok in that from the outset a word nation did not lose a meaning as a community by birth and fate in a Western context. Second, telling civic nationalism from ethnic nationalism is problematic, and it can be recognized that ethnicity and citizenship in nation-state function as logics for repression and exclusion. We thus encounter another dilemma in the process of reproducing nation by which alienating ‘Others’ immediately means identifying and disciplining ‘Us’ at the same time. Of importance is, however, the fact that ethnicity and citizenship also show the possibilities for liberty and inclusion. Indeed, nationalism is not inherently good or bad, and what matters is to persistently advocate the rights of ethnic minorities and non-citizens in nation-state, enlarging and deepening the scope and extent of democracy. These propositions remind us to reconsider the power and endurance of nationalism, in particular, in a globalized world.