11-02-2018, 02:08 PM
Nationalism brings with it an air of cultural superiority that goes a little far. If you look at the Webster's definition you copied, and you scroll down the page it is on, it gets into the differences between patriotism, nationalism, sectionalism, and jingoism. Disregarding sectionalism, because that is an outlier here as a regional thing, patriotism, nationalism, and jingoism are a spectrum. Patriotism is nationalism without the sense of superiority. Nationalism is jingoism without the war mongering. By itself, nationalism when looked at in this way is fine. The issues I have with nationalism come into play when we look at it in context.
My first issue with nationalism is that it can cause someone to not see inadequacies in the current systems. If you feel that you are a superior nation to all others, then it will be difficult for you to be critical of your country in a meaningful way. Nationalism in the US carries with it those red, white, and blue tinted glasses that can hide things in society that would make us uncomfortable to realize exist in our society.
My other major issues with nationalism are in the realm of foreign relations. The nationalist is more likely to approach foreign relations as a zero-sum game. We see this with the Trump foreign policy. Zero-sum foreign policy can damage our alliances, hurt us in trade situations, and embroil us in war. It is an approach to foreign policy that neglects our role in the global community and has some isolationist tendencies as a result. Why do we need them when we are the best?
As I said, all of this is on a spectrum and so there are mild and extreme varieties. What is most concerning, though, is that leaders can easily slide over towards jingoism because nationalism can have a compounding effect. If a zero-sum foreign policy game that was implemented through nationalist intentions results in shattered relations, then war is on the horizon, and with it the next part of the spectrum.
So, nationalism itself, not a big deal. How it plays out with regards to policy can be highly problematic, though.
My first issue with nationalism is that it can cause someone to not see inadequacies in the current systems. If you feel that you are a superior nation to all others, then it will be difficult for you to be critical of your country in a meaningful way. Nationalism in the US carries with it those red, white, and blue tinted glasses that can hide things in society that would make us uncomfortable to realize exist in our society.
My other major issues with nationalism are in the realm of foreign relations. The nationalist is more likely to approach foreign relations as a zero-sum game. We see this with the Trump foreign policy. Zero-sum foreign policy can damage our alliances, hurt us in trade situations, and embroil us in war. It is an approach to foreign policy that neglects our role in the global community and has some isolationist tendencies as a result. Why do we need them when we are the best?
As I said, all of this is on a spectrum and so there are mild and extreme varieties. What is most concerning, though, is that leaders can easily slide over towards jingoism because nationalism can have a compounding effect. If a zero-sum foreign policy game that was implemented through nationalist intentions results in shattered relations, then war is on the horizon, and with it the next part of the spectrum.
So, nationalism itself, not a big deal. How it plays out with regards to policy can be highly problematic, though.
"A great democracy has got to be progressive, or it will soon cease to be either great or a democracy..." - TR
"The test of our progress is not whether we add more to the abundance of those who have much; it is whether we provide enough for those who have too little." - FDR
"The test of our progress is not whether we add more to the abundance of those who have much; it is whether we provide enough for those who have too little." - FDR
