Nationalism

[Dill]

(11-02-2018, 06:57 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: Quote:Is it a welcoming "melting pot" or is it "white Christian"?

This is one of the reasons P&R is so toxic.  In no way shape or form did I intimate this.  I think we'd all very much appreciate if debate on this sub-forum excluded loaded questions such as these that clearly attempt to portray the other person as a bigot or extremist.  Put simply, you can do better than this, so please do so.

Fred's is a worthwhile question, given the history of the term and the manner in which it has come to the fore in current politics, a time when many are questioning the president's use of the term "nationalism" precisely because it connotes white nationalism for many now.   You allude to this in your very first statement: "There's been a lot of uproar over Trump describing himself as a nationalist." And the uproar is precisely about whether Trump means what so many white nationalists seem to think he means. 

Given this current context, it is certainly worthwhile to raise a discussion of the meaning of "nationalism," as you do, along with related terms like "patriotism." (I assumed when you posed your question, it was about this general situation and not your personal definition or practice of nationalism. And I am still responding on that assumption.)

So what is "culture" and how does one define it if one function of nationalism is to promote it? E.g., is it something the nation is supposed to protect from foreign contamination or is it something that pretty much takes care of itself, though we may offer gov. support for some of its institutions? Is it mainly the property of one demographic? Does it specifically exclude any demographic? I don't expect people to have immediate answers to such questions; your thread offers people a chance to explore them in relation to the question of nationalism.  

The cultural question also teases out different contextual senses of the word nationalism. When a colony is fighting for independence from a mother country, those for independence are often called "nationalists"--until they win. Then they are just Colombians or Arabians or Chinese. The word makes sense in that situation.  When people/governments are trying to consolidate greater control over an already long-constituted nation via "nationalist" identification, then usually something else is up, something related to personal identity under internal as much as external threat. Questions/definitions of culture come to the fore then because of the central role culture plays in constituting identity.

All of which leads back to your question: "would we, as a nation, not want every single POTUS we ever have to be a nationalist? They are the President of the United States, should not the United States be their primary concern at all time?"

I don't think all presidents have been "nationalist" as defined in post #1. At the same time, I cannot think of a POTUS whose primary concern was ever any nation other than the U.S.

But Trump and other Republicans, flying under the anti-globalist banner, speak as if this were not the case--as if spending on foreign aid, respect for the interests and autonomy of allies and for the human rights of non-citizens necessarily placed these others above the U.S. and its citizens. To me, this suggests an implicit definition of nationalism which rejects the prevailing international legal order in favor of something with a more local, ethnic flavor.

I.e., rather than assenting to a nation in an international system predicated on UNIVERSAL human rights (presumed regardless of race, religion or ethnicity) and equality, Trump and Co. would like to see much of that existing order rolled back, with nations acting on the more local and particularist self definitions. Screw equality in favor of hierarchically constructed identities. We see this play out with legal (conceptual) and national borders especially, where Trump policies challenge the universal rights of non-Americans. No universal human rights, would mean no ground for universal right to asylum.

NB: Also, I am having fun thinking of presidents who were "nationalist" in various senses of the term.  Maybe Washington BEFORE he was president, Lincoln DURING the Civil War, in the sense they were pulling a nation together; Jackson certainly, maybe Polk too; and TR Roosevelt and Reagan.