Nationalism - good or bad?

I don't care much for nationalism, It puts too much trust in a central gov't. I see nationalism as the sheeple just doing everything their told to do by the authorities. The sheeple are supposed to be in favor with all the gov't decisions. Example, the war in Iraq, a nationalist would believe it is a good thing, because they want to be patriotic and support the gov't.
I like how the country was designed, a time in which people's loyality went to their state. For instance I am from Pennsylvaina, so I am a citizen of Pennsylvaina first then the US second. The more centralized societies get, the less free the people are, but when that happens people are reffered as sheeple.

The best use of nationalism is an occasional use. Like when the USA beat Russia in the hockey olympics. Be proud, stand behind your nation, then move on. Don't practice nationalism as a way of life - leave that to the Majors and Generals.

Originally posted by RedOctober90

Russia never practiced communism, it was a label often exploited by the bourgeois in the West. For one example, Russia had a ruling class... and there is no ruling class under communism.

Maybe there is no ruling class in theory, but in practice, any time you have one group of people making decisions for another group of people, it's a class system.

An interesting option here is perhaps the concept of being authentically native to a place. This is an idea explored far more adequately by agrarian and environmental writers than I could do justice.

Regardless, the idea is that we actually become rooted to a community and a landscape. Our culture of fluidity in labor demands that we be able to be transferred from Washington to Chicago in the name of that job. So, we have no authentic commitment to the place we live(d) in. We fail to genuinely live anywhere. Our towns in such a society are husks of actual communities. Becoming native means living downstream from one another. It means buying locally. It means caring for the long-term of a place because your identity is genuinely intertwined with it's health and vivacity. If a river is dammed in your fishing community, you will suffer as unemployment guts the town. If big-box stores come in and push out small businesses, you feel the difference.

That is what I think a healthy form of nationalism. It's not just a commitment to a few nebulous ideas like freedom and democracy (though they are certainly good things!). Nationalism means nativity, nativeness. You're not just in a public debate to protect your place' name and reputation("America is a great country!" and all that...). You're in it because you care about that little corner of the land that you call your own community. Your neighbors and coworkers. For example, maybe you side against a draft because it would mean those fine young men in your aging community would leave. It means having your fingers always on the pulse of your neighbors and home land.

If we all lived like this in our own communities, the world would change. Thinking globally and acting locally is what real nationalism is. Seeing the interconnectedness of the overall health of all communities of life -- human, political, economic, ecological, biological, spiritual -- is deep and real nationalism.

Originally posted by Cascadian1
Nationalism means nativity, nativeness.

Not necessarily. At least this way of thinking of it wouldn't apply to germans native to austria and conflicting with serbs native to the AH empire. But nationalism defintily came into play there. Also, whats 'native'? Are 'Germans' native to germany? How, when they orignally come from further north? And how, when they've absorbed so many other 'ethnic' groups, ie groups that dont' speak german? Are the French german? The name 'france' comes from the Franks, a thouroughyl germanic tribe that filled parts of modern france. So is the national 'ethnic german state' modern germany, or need it include austria, france, belgium holland gotland denmark and parts of italy?

If we all lived like this in our own communities, the world would change. Thinking globally and acting locally is what real nationalism is.

I really don't see the connection. Nationalists call for "Ethnic States" for different Nationalities. Not for small cooperative communitites. If this were what nationalism was, then germans living in the south of the country would unite with Slavs, rather than try to work 'pan-germanically'.

Originally posted by Nygdan
Are 'Germans' native to germany? How, when they orignally come from further north? And how, when they've absorbed so many other 'ethnic' groups, ie groups that dont' speak german?

Also Germany was a very young country when nationalism took hold, their national identity was taken from the Imperialistic past of the Holy Roman Empire, which shows that nationalism can be percieved to be what ever the follower believes it to be.

In Germany it was that all none Germans were weak and deserved to be conquered.

However, in America, nationalism and patriotism has helped peacefully unite people who orginated from all four corners of the globe.

Nationalism can be good when it is in its mild/moderate form, but when it creeps into extremeism then it is to be feared.




[Edited on 29-11-2004 by UK Wizard]

Originally posted by jsobecky

Originally posted by RedOctober90

Russia never practiced communism, it was a label often exploited by the bourgeois in the West. For one example, Russia had a ruling class... and there is no ruling class under communism.

Maybe there is no ruling class in theory, but in practice, any time you have one group of people making decisions for another group of people, it's a class system.

It's a worker controlled society.. USA democracy makes use of a system where corporate funded/backed candidates are elected into position and then are allowed to run rampant.. even with the "balance of power" checks in place.. supreme court, ect... there is plenty the politicans can do without consent of the people who elect them. So what we have is a government ran by the corporations.

The "ruling class" in this case of communism is the worker... the citizen. The bourgeoisie has little power in government.. for the bourgeoisie is usually self-centered and works to improve themselves. This is the same bourgeoisie in the USA right now which uses the government to gain profit, often by starting wars and killing hundreds of thousands needlessly while promoting a false "enemy" that were suddenly supposed to go out and fight.

Nygdan--

I should clarify that by being native, I don't mean affiliating with the ethnic groups of that region, much less all of its culture.

I mean be native to a landscape and a community. It means being neighborly and civicly active. It means not taking private property so darn seriously, but instead realizing that whatever one of us does, it affects us all.

That's one thing I've learned form ecology -- that wer're all in it together. And I believe it is a wisdom which can deeply nourish a rethinking of what nationalism is.

It is the fundamental difference some liberals have made since 9/11: patriotism doesn't mean "my country right or wrong" nor does it mean we're the best; true patriotism is about working earnestly to make your homeland a better place. Ethnicity and lingustic tricks regarding what you call yourself mean far less than caring for the overarching community of lives (human and nonhuman) which nurture and supports itself. It means making room for life.

I know I'm going outside the standard concept of nationalism, but thanks for bearing with it.

Originally posted by Cascadian1
I know I'm going outside the standard concept of nationalism, but thanks for bearing with it.

Actually it really isn't if you thin about it. The Facists in italy were called that because (1) of the fasces itself and (2) because the word apparently sounds like one of the italian words for peasant or field worker or something like that. They were 'communitarian' and concerned about the success of the group as a whole. In nazi germany the 'ethnic' identity became overstated, but, as ethnic identities are pretty malleable in the first place, its not so far from what you are saying. Two different communitites living near one another and working together will eventually come up with a 'nationalist' identity and recognize themselves as seperate from others. Amoung the nazis and hitler's rhetoric in particular, appeals to the 'land' and man's connectedness with it were also made, as well as denigrations for 'technology and science' which were seen as abstract and the sorts of things that seperated man from his 'real' self, as somone connected to the lanscape he lives in and the people he grew up around.

but when does nationalism turn bad?

When it turns to hatred of other nations, or of a certain group or groups of minorities.

Nazi Germany is of course, the best example of Nationalism gone bad... I'd wager we're seeing it occur again, on a smaller scale, in my own beloved country, directed at Muslims in general, largely due to most people's ignorance of their ways and beliefs, and instead, simply relying on news images of radicals chanting "Death to America" for their views of Muslims... It's sad to realize that history really does repeat itself...and even sadder to realize that you're witnessing the spark of it once again...

Originally posted by Gazrok
When it turns to hatred of other nations, or of a certain group or groups of minorities.

Nazi Germany is of course, the best example of Nationalism gone bad... I'd wager we're seeing it occur again, on a smaller scale, in my own beloved country, directed at Muslims in general, largely due to most people's ignorance of their ways and beliefs, and instead, simply relying on news images of radicals chanting "Death to America" for their views of Muslims... It's sad to realize that history really does repeat itself...and even sadder to realize that you're witnessing the spark of it once again...

I totally agree with you,
its sad to see that we cannot learn from our mistakes

Nationalism is good.

It causes a nation to be more competitive, it causes a people to work harder.

Had it not been for nationalism, the US would have lost the Cold War.

Had it not been for nationalism, Spain would have never sent Columbus across the ocean.

Had it not been for nationalism, the US would not have put the first man on the moon.

I think a lot of people here have confused Nationalism with Patriotism.

Nationalist states believe that everything should be done without co-operating with other states. It is a case of always acting independantly rather than collectively. Always looking out for Number One. In the modern era that's a very dangerous game to play.



[edit on 20-1-2005 by Leveller]

Originally posted by jsobecky
The best use of nationalism is an occasional use. Like when the USA beat Russia in the hockey olympics. Be proud, stand behind your nation, then move on. Don't practice nationalism as a way of life - leave that to the Majors and Generals.

First off sorry to solo you out.

That is an example of patriotism, not nationalism. Nationalism is a way of life. If you are a nationalist, you speak the language, follow the coustums and most importantly keeping your nationalities identity alive.


To all of you talking about one human family, all members in a family are different, leave them that way. People should take pride in where they are from and keep that identity alive.

Nationalism is wonderful, when used in moderation.