Society/Culture So what is so wrong with 'Nationalism'?

[Sweet Jesus]

What would have been your idealistic solution to Indian and Pakistani nationalist uprisings to end the British Raj?

Gandhi the nationalist warmonger.

 

[Malifice]

What would have been your idealistic solution to Indian and Pakistani nationalist uprisings to end the British Raj?

Would you have denied the Jewish people their homeland? Or the Palestinians their own state? How about the Scots, or the Catalans?

Because there hasn't been any nationalistic violence in Northern Spain, Ireland, Israel, Palestine, India or Pakistan has there?

That violence is a strike against nationalism, not a tick in the positive column.

And no, I don't deny the right of a people to this social construct you call a 'homeland' as ridiculous as such a concept is. I do argue that such measures should be attained without resort to violence (such as the Scottish referendum, and the current state of affairs in Ireland).

 

[Frank Bunn]

Because there hasn't been any nationalistic violence in Northern Spain, Ireland, Israel, Palestine, India or Pakistan has there?

That violence is a strike against nationalism, not a tick in the positive column.

And no, I don't deny the right of a people to this social construct you call a 'homeland' as ridiculous as such a concept is. I do argue that such measures should be attained without resort to violence (such as the Scottish referendum, and the current state of affairs in Ireland).

So you can have nationalism without violence. Cool.

 

[Sweet Jesus]

And no, I don't deny the right of a people to this social construct you call a 'homeland' as ridiculous as such a concept is.

What is your preferred alternative to the ridiculous concept of nation states?

 

[Scotland]

Nations are great because of the individuals in them. Also nations are bad.

 

[CatFan79]

Bet France could use a bit of Nationalism right now. All that mass immigration and acceptance of 'other cultures' aint working out so well now is it...

Shame they didn't realise when you're dealing with extreme muslims it's 'all in' or you're the enemy.... Literally.

 

[RobbieK]

What a train wreck of ignorance this thread is.

That was over religion.

You think that Indian and Pakistani nationalisms are separable from religion?

 

[Sweet Jesus]

You think that Indian and Pakistani nationalisms are separable from religion?

In India's case, yes. At least in its conception. Modern India was established as a secular nation, although it is not enshrined as clearly as in the West.

 

[Poor Form]

Did you miss the Great War and WW2?

Both caused by rampant Nationalism.

Do you want ultra-nationalist Europe squabbling amongst itself, or an integrated and open Europe working together?

Nationalism is a precursor to war. Healthy patriotism is one thing. Nationalism is another thing entirely.

WW1 was not nationalism it was globalism, alliances are what caused all the great powers to get dragged in.

 

[Malifice]

WW1 was not nationalism

Wut?

 

[Poor Form]

Wut?

WW1 was the a demonstration of the risk of globalism, competing alliances to "open up" countries to each other resulted in big powers getting dragged in to war.

 

[Malifice]

WW1 was the a demonstration of the risk of globalism, competing alliances to "open up" countries to each other resulted in big powers getting dragged in to war.

That's not globalism, any more than the Axis alliance was 'globalism'.

Nationalism was a prominent force in early 20th century Europe and a significant cause of World War I.

https://alphahistory.com/worldwar1/...lism was a new,unification of Germany in 1871.

If Europe once again devolved into competing Nation States, with strong nationalist governments, and no EU, they'd be at war again within years.

 

[Roylion]

WW1 was the a demonstration of the risk of globalism, competing alliances to "open up" countries to each other resulted in big powers getting dragged in to war.

The causes of WW1 were a combination of nationalism, militarism and imperialism.

 

[Ohitsthatguy]

Leaders like Xi Jinping and Modi have harnessed it to control their countries.

You could also argue the USA are very nationalistic but have avoided the totalitarian trap

 

[rank and file]

Leaders like Xi Jinping and Modi have harnessed it to control their countries.

You could also argue the USA are very nationalistic but have avoided the totalitarian trap

Nationalism is just dog-whisting to voters so you can harness the control.
China doesn't even bother.

Countries have borders and it's easy to play on the fears of the people within those borders.

Not sure if it's the road to evil.

 

[Geelong_Sicko]

Exclusionary nationalism is evil. If you pump up pride in the nation but make it inclusionary across all of your citizens it is far less of an evil.

To the people within your borders, anyway.

 

[Richard Pryor]

Nationalism as in pride in the nation is fine, but politicians exclusively use nationalism as a smokescreen. Someone who is serving the nation should love the nation and want it to do well as a default assumption, if they feel the need to go out of their way to tell you they do they're probably doing something they feel they have to manipulate the public into going along with to some degree.

 

[Gethelred]

Leaders like Xi Jinping and Modi have harnessed it to control their countries.

You could also argue the USA are very nationalistic but have avoided the totalitarian trap

...

Persecution of Uyghurs in China - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

2002 Gujarat violence - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

I'm sorry, but 'harnessed' it? Both leaders have murdered people based on what they were; Uyghurs in China, before Xi was leader; muslims in Gujarat by Modi as part of his rise.

Nationalism is a component of fascism; not all nationalists are fascist, but all fascists are nationalists.

Then, we get to the second contention of your post; that the USA have avoided the totalitarian trap. For ****'s sake, are you ****ing kidding?

I've Hesitated to Call Donald Trump a Fascist. Until Now

After last week the label seems not just acceptable, but necessary.

www.newsweek.com

Robert Paxton - separate to Trump - defined fascism as paleogenic ultra-nationalism; the nigh religious belief in a once great past, coupled with the idea that we can make it great again via the use of force and the repression of dissent. Modi is absolutely a fascist, and - arguably - so was Trump. Xi is only harder to qualify as fascist due to the trappings of collectivism inherent in China's post-communist system, but he and the government around him share more than passing similarities with other capitalist countries subject to fierce government control.

This is genuinely one of the more ignorant things you've ever penned.

 

[#23 Hill]

In the last two decades there's been 'noise' around this apparent evil called 'nationalism'.

In other threads I've skimmed over there seems to be some sort of fear of having pride in the nation you and your descendants were born in.

Why is that? What is this evil in having pride in your nation?

I'm fascinated by those who passionately oppose national pride and would like to know why these types are so averse to national pride, what is this poison to society that is caused by nationalism? Why is it so dangerous?

There are plenty on these boards that have immense pride (that I can gauge by some of the posts) in opposing nationalism.

I think it is more noise than an actual problem, but for those who are vehemently in opposition to having pride in your nation? What is the actual threat of nationalism?

This should make for an interesting debate, and will show us who has pride and who has a problem with it.

I'm a working class white guy, living on stolen Aboriginal land, where the richest 1% run the nation's economy and government, destroying our environment and screwing over ordinary Australians in the process. Said ordinary Australians are apathetic about this and keep electing governments who perpetuate the current status quo. What aspect of the nation am I suppossed to take pride in?

 

[Schneebly11]

Countries have borders and it's easy to play on the fears of the people within those borders.

Several things have happened in recent decades to change that. Boom in low cost international travel, more migration, especially from non Caucasian nations. Internet and the ability to access information from overseas sources as easy as local ones.

Look at how far less people are interested in Australia Day in 2023 compared to 20 years ago.

 

[Ohitsthatguy]

Nationalism is a component of fascism

But that's not true. Fascism is a far right ideology but nationalism can can occur in left wing countries.

And with countries like India, where religion is so intertwined with their politics, Modi has used the Hindu majority to promote an Indian/Hindu nationalism.

But I'll admit I was a little drunk when posting that so it wasn't that well thought out. I also enjoy reading posts from people like you who are smarter than me on the subject.

 

[Gethelred]

But that's not true. Fascism is a far right ideology but nationalism can can occur in left wing countries.

You are confusing patriotism - the love of country from an individual - with the potentially enforced love of country mandated by government across wider society which is nationalism.

Check out some of the earlier pages of this thread for some of the discussion from the last time this came up.

And with countries like India, where religion is so intertwined with their politics, Modi has used the Hindu majority to promote an Indian/Hindu nationalism.

But I'll admit I was a little drunk when posting that so it wasn't that well thought out. I also enjoy reading posts from people like you who are smarter than me on the subject.

Eh, drunk posting is the best posting. You do you, mate.

 

[Carringbush2010]

I'm a working class white guy, living on stolen Aboriginal land, where the richest 1% run the nation's economy and government, destroying our environment and screwing over ordinary Australians in the process. Said ordinary Australians are apathetic about this and keep electing governments who perpetuate the current status quo. What aspect of the nation am I suppossed to take pride in?

Well if you look through the thread (and other sources if you wish) there are actual events / people to have pride in. Just off the top of my head.

• Womens & Mens national cricket team
• National netball team
• The Lawrence brothers, especially Jett (google that)
• Penny Wong and Albo doin 'diplomatically' well, helping out Ukraine, not sucking up to Xi or Vlad etc.
• Oscar Piastri
• The many scientific and medical breakthroughs
• The many inventions and innovations

Or you could be just be self loathing and concentrate on the negative, which you seem to be doing.

 

[Carringbush2010]

Nationalism as in pride in the nation is fine,

And that's how it should be defined IMO.

 

[Richard Pryor]

You are confusing patriotism - the love of country from an individual - with the potentially enforced love of country mandated by government across wider society which is nationalism.

This is a good distinction that I hadn't really considered. If you divorce partisan political agendas from nationalism you get patriotism as its own distinct thing.

From first page of googling patriotism Vs nationalism found this interesting article "Patriotism" vs. "Nationalism": What's The Difference?

The gist I get from it is that the main distinction is that nationalism, in terms of connotation and usage, is more associated with the idea of superiority of a nation and its attributes and the inferiority of other nations and attributes, whereas patriotism is more just about appreciation of aspects of a country without that comparative competitive aspect.