Towards a Useful Theory of Nationalism

[VetLegion]

I'm trying to merge what I know about history, current affairs, biology, evolutionary psychology, morality and common sense into a useful theory of nationalism.

A justification, perhaps, is also a good word. I don't know about your countries... but here the word "nationalist" has a negative ring to it. The more smart and educated a person is, the more likely he or she will distance him/herself from nationalism.

I think that our standard reflections on nationalism have been shaped by tragic events like world wars and genocide. And communism.

This has brought us problems as people struggle to find an acceptable expression of their feelings. Some (this is common in media) make a distinction between patriotism (positive emotions about one's country) and nationalism-chauvinism (a set of negative emotions).

It's a completely artificial division. In the same way a person can't be either all good or all bad, one's feelings towards his country and people can't be all postive or all negative. Nationalism means not only an affinity towards similar, but also a preference of own over foreign and a suspicion and dislike of foreign (normally not hatred, but in war, hatred also).

Questions such as immigration usually expose how confused most people are about all this.
It is weird (and perhaps worrisome) that societies' smartest individuals have superficial, knee-jerk views about such an important topic.

My opinions about nationalism are better thought out than is common (because nobody thinks about it), yet I hit a brick wall every time I try to ground them deeper and formalize them. I won't bother you with the lot of it, this post is too long already. But I am curious what you think:

- do you see the same problem I am seeing? A rift between what the population feels and what the media tell them to think?

- do you really believe that it is possible to only have positive emotions about your country?

- if you love your country, do you know why you love it?

[KrazyHorse]

There's only two things I hate in this world. People who are intolerant of other people's cultures and the Dutch.

[Blaupanzer]

In the early '20s, Nationalism was blamed as the "real" reason behind WW I by a broad part of the surviving intellectuals. As Europe broke into one set of pieces on its way to a second set post WW II and a third set today, the behavior and expressed attitudes of the "Nationalists" did not improve their standing with the rest of the population. Hence, we get your "if it's negatively expressed, it's nationalism; if it's positive, then it's patriotism." Obviously, both sets of emotions come from the same emotional pool.

[Ben Kenobi]

Communism really is the anti-thesis of nationalism. They gage people not by their nationality but their class.

There are generally only a few alternatives.

1. Pure individuals. People do not have any responsibilities to anyone but themselves. This is maybe Rand.

2. Family/Clan. People have responsibilities only to those they are related by blood.

3. Nationalism. People have responsibilities to those who are in the same country.

4. Internationalism. People have responsibilities to the world as a whole.

5. Faith. People have responsibilities to those within their own faith.

6. Class. People have responsibilities to those within their class.

7. Language. People have responsibilities to those within their same language group.

Why do I love my country? I don't, not really. I love America, but that doesn't make me a nationalist as I am not yet an American. I love my faith, and that transcends national boundaries. I care about the Commonwealth, which falls in 7. So I guess I'd be 5,7,2,3 in order.

[VetLegion]

We can condense further. It comes down to whether you feel you have responsibilities towards individuals who share your genes or whether you are an "idea man" who has responsibilities towards people who share his idea(s).

[Ben Kenobi]

All of these 7 are very distinct from one another.

I could just as easily argue Shakespeare on the point that blood ties link us all.

[Traianvs]

I don't know what you mean with

A rift between what the population feels and what the media tell them to think?"

Do you mean that nationalism ought to be portrayed more positively? In any case where I live, Nationalism and Patriotism are frowned upon too by the left and the intellectuals. To be honest I'm good with that.

It's logical for a human being to prefer anything in close proximity. Thousands of years ago this was the family unit, then after a while the clan, city state and so on as ways of communication improved. This 'nationalistic' feeling is so coincidental that in a modern society it only serves to hold a nation together. Makes it function. Anything more than that is a blight for the human race as it fuels antagonism and hatred.

do you really believe that it is possible to only have positive emotions about your country?

Some people do, so yes I assume?

if you love your country, do you know why you love it?

I don't love my country, but I appreciate it for all the good it stands for. I'm happy that I live here instead of another country whose values don't correspond to mine, that's all. It's different from a vague but strong "Blut und Boden" attachment many people have with their homeland. That's nonsensical and just ridiculous.

You should be critical of your country and scrutinize it whenever you can to ensure a stabilizing balance of power. Too much nationalism blurs the ability and willingness to do that; and that's never a good thing, whether it's left or right on the political spectrum.

[VetLegion]

I don't love my country, but I appreciate it for all the good it stands for. I'm happy that I live here instead of another country whose values don't correspond to mine, that's all. It's different from a vague but strong "Blut und Boden" attachment many people have with their homeland. That's nonsensical and just ridiculous.

Would you defend it? If Netherlands invaded Belgium, would you stay and possibly die fighting of would you move 100 km to neutral France? If you would stay, why?

[DirtyMartini]

There's only two things I hate in this world. People who are intolerant of other people's cultures and the Dutch.

it's rare that one finds an opportunity to quote that particular movie.

wait, i'm thinking of the wrong movie

Never mind.

no, wait, I was right the first time.

[Traianvs]

Would you defend it? If Netherlands invaded Belgium, would you stay and possibly die fighting of would you move 100 km to neutral France? If you would stay, why?

Very hypothetical because friendly nations generally do not attack eachother. I figure that if a country tries to invade and impose values and laws that totally contradict my own then yes I might consider resistance.

In the case of the Netherlands, then no not really. Why would I. Boundaries in the 21st century are so passé anyway, especially in Europe...

I might flee in order to prevent myself falling victim to atrocities though.

[VetLegion]

I might flee in order to prevent myself falling victim to atrocities though.

I expected you'd reply that of course you would stay and fight

Don't know what to reply to the opposite. It probably isn't even true, you'd stay and fight the Dutch but you aren't even aware of it right now.

[Cort Haus]

We can condense further. It comes down to whether you feel you have responsibilities towards individuals who share your genes or whether you are an "idea man" who has responsibilities towards people who share his idea(s).

I don't agree that a sense of country is necessarily so closely tied to the idea of 'race' - as you seem to imply with the talk of gene-sharing.

My country is full of people with ancestry from all over the place. What I love about the country has nothing to do with gene purity - in many cases it is the opposite.

[Ben Kenobi]

Which raises a question, as to how much nationalism is based on 'race' or on culture.

There are cultural similarities with most of what's referred to the Anglosphere, which tie people together. This is what Cort Haus is referring to. How much of what makes the english english has to do with Runnymede?

[notyoueither]

In the early '20s, Nationalism was blamed as the "real" reason behind WW I by a broad part of the surviving intellectuals. As Europe broke into one set of pieces on its way to a second set post WW II and a third set today, the behavior and expressed attitudes of the "Nationalists" did not improve their standing with the rest of the population. Hence, we get your "if it's negatively expressed, it's nationalism; if it's positive, then it's patriotism." Obviously, both sets of emotions come from the same emotional pool.

Most of the Brits I've heard on the topic are not overly fond of patriotism either.

[Sava]

Communism really is the anti-thesis of nationalism. They gage people not by their nationality but their class.

There are generally only a few alternatives.

1. Pure individuals. People do not have any responsibilities to anyone but themselves. This is maybe Rand.

2. Family/Clan. People have responsibilities only to those they are related by blood.

3. Nationalism. People have responsibilities to those who are in the same country.

4. Internationalism. People have responsibilities to the world as a whole.

5. Faith. People have responsibilities to those within their own faith.

6. Class. People have responsibilities to those within their class.

7. Language. People have responsibilities to those within their same language group.

Why do I love my country? I don't, not really. I love America, but that doesn't make me a nationalist as I am not yet an American. I love my faith, and that transcends national boundaries. I care about the Commonwealth, which falls in 7. So I guess I'd be 5,7,2,3 in order.

It's so much easier just to hate everybody