Nationalism

[kks23]

Hii i really need answers to these questions, i would really appreciate if you give them !! thaank you so much =)

1. What do you think about nationalism as a culture ?
2. What do you think about nationalism as ideology ?
3. What do you think about nationalism as sentiment ?
4. What do you think about nationalism as a social movement ?

[arildno]

define nationalism.

[russ_watters]

Sounds like homework - what do you think?

[Galteeth]

"Nationalism is an infantile disease. It is the measles of mankind."

[Astronuc]

Something to think about.

Can we do better than nationalism?
By Stuart Ford on August 17th, 2009
http://mydailyclarity.com/2009/08/can-we-do-better-than-nationalism/

[0xDEADBEEF]

patriotism [n]:
A social disease placing real estate over moral values

[aPhilosopher]

1. What do you think about nationalism as a culture ?

It's not a very good one.


2. What do you think about nationalism as ideology ?

It's not a very good one.


3. What do you think about nationalism as sentiment ?

It's not a very good one.


4. What do you think about nationalism as a social movement ?

It's not a very good one.


0xDEADBEEF, I think you're mistaken. Patriotism is not nationalism.

Patriotism is what I feel for my country and nationalism is what you feel for your country. See the difference?

[socrunningman]

Hii i really need answers to these questions, i would really appreciate if you give them !! thaank you so much =)

1. What do you think about nationalism as a culture ?
2. What do you think about nationalism as ideology ?
3. What do you think about nationalism as sentiment ?
4. What do you think about nationalism as a social movement ?

so, here is where it lies. To answer this question one does have to define what they mean by nationalism. Usually when someone says "nationalism" people think of the Nazi's in WWII. This is inherently wrong as anything other than a misleading marker. For Nazi's where mostly fascist, nationalism was not all of what they where about, infact one might argue that it was just a tool used by the party(or weakness of the people) to manipulate and drive the populous towards on end.

Nationalism(in all of its forms) in itself is another way of saying that the nation is important and over takes the wants and needs of an individual citizen in favour of those of the entire nation itself, with the leaders deciding what those things are and are not.

Now obviously I have just as equally described Modern Day Iran and the United States, as well as almost every country I can think of, because the concept of Nationalism might have been defined somewhat more recently in human history but the underpinnings of its fundamentals are part of us humans(think economics, where there no economies before Adam Smith?)

Now, to answer your questions...

For a system of government I like Theodore Roosevelt's concept of New Nationalism, which many people in America regard as a successful presidency. He viewed the nation as not just being the citizens that currently live in it, but also the children of those citizens, as well as all the future immigrant citizens, and therefore decisions of the country should factor them in as well. we see a lot of this today in the form of national parks, monuments, historic sites, education, etc etc. He also proposed something(although during his Bull Moose Campaign) called the "square deal." In it he wanted to do many things including establishing care for the elderly, a system of free hospitals nation wide, bolstering of the navy, a meeting hall for world leaders, getting rid of unions and "bad" trusts amoung other things.

Many years later his nephew would take a few of these ideas and call them "the new deal." and honestly, who wouldn't want those things? would any of us enjoy crater lake in oregon if it had instead been bought and then razed of all of it's timber?

in this form I answer your questions thusly
1.)great
2.)wonderful
3.)interesting
4.)wish it would have worked out sooner

in the form found inside of fascism AND communism I answer thusly
1.)Bad intentions with a bad result
2.)interesting and intriguing in multiple ways more in it's ambiguous nature than anything else
3.)meh
4.)the movement wasn't social as much as an upheaval of the past failure of the government to provide national happiness to the majority of the populous

[WhoWee]

Hii i really need answers to these questions, i would really appreciate if you give them !! thaank you so much =)

1. What do you think about nationalism as a culture ?
2. What do you think about nationalism as ideology ?
3. What do you think about nationalism as sentiment ?
4. What do you think about nationalism as a social movement ?

In the context of your questions, is personal freedom surrendered?

[alxm]

I view nationalism as the doctrine of the advocacy of nation-states - One people (ethnically) - one country (politically). A mainly 19th century ideology that lead to the Italian and German unifications among others (and in the latter case, ultimately to the Nazis) The doctrine is inherently oppressive. There are always and will always be ethnic minorities, unless fundamental human rights are infringed. (ultimately: genocide or 'ethnic cleansing'), and ethnic minorities will practically always by definition be second-class citizens to nationalists.

It also typically encourages historical revisionism. Nationalists ignore and try to expunge 'foreign' elements from their history in order to create an image of historic national unity and homogeneity that never existed.


in the form found inside of fascism AND communism I answer thusly


Woah, what do you mean by communism? Communism, the ideology, is not inherently nationalist. Quite the opposite; communism and the related 19th century anarchist and socialist movements were strongly anti-nationalist, stressing international solidarity, etc. Hence The Internationale, etc.

Communism, as a designation for the regimes that called themselves such, was much more nationalist. Especially the Soviet Union under Stalin.

[socrunningman]

The communism found after Lenin(I do not make judgment on what it was or was not during, as it is a different topic) in Russia and in China, as well as Cuba was very nationalistic. I tend to separate Marxism from communism as the agreed upon definition of communism in the political sense is that found under lenin, stalin, mao and their followers. This form of communism was in many cases based on nationalist identity(but here I differ because I do not feel that nation has to be one race(as italy and the US will agree) because at this time the Welsh where a different race, as with the Sicilians and Bavarians, etc, The Nation was more defined by what is also called a state, today we call these entities nation-states, nation referring to ethnicity yes, but there are many exceptions for instance russia and the united states as well as SA, brittian, mexico and others.)

Communism as defined by Marx was most defiantly not in favor of the notion of national identity, however it was never really addressed, as the main issue was that of class and the working proletariat rising up against the bourgeois. In the Marxist sense Russia and China could not have attained communism as they must take the necessary steps, also China (although recognized as communist) actually calls its form of government socialism.

In the above post I was merely trying to show how nationalism has many different forms, and putting it into the box of national socialism (NAZI) is not quite fair, after all many years ago people used the term nationalist and patriot in the same way, and the definition of patriot and nationalist is not that far from each other even today.

Random House Dictionary(what i have on hand)
Patriot Origin 1590
a person who loves, supports, and defends his or her country and its interests with devotion.
Nationalist Origin 1705
a member of a political group advocating or fighting for national independence, a strong national government, etc.

Again I point out that Nationalist movements where a major force in America interestingly on both sides of the isle fighting for opposite things at many times, and even today nationalist tenancies can have one person saying they are supporting the ideals of the country and saying one thing(lets go with anti war) and another also saying they are supporting the ideals of the country and saying another thing(lets say pro going to war) same argument resulting in a different answer because of a different individual view point of what the nation is. Hence why I specified about the leaders of a nation because ultimately in any modern society they are the ones that make the wants of any group come to fruition or stay under the table. Good case in Nationalism was the Parks system, Bad was the Holocaust, Good was the breaking of trusts, bad was the Italian invasion of Ethiopia(Or as I call it "sticks and stones won't break my tank")

~socrunningman