Dismiss Notice
Join Physics Forums Today!
The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

Nationalism as a culture ?

  1. Sep 8, 2009 #1
    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 ?
  2. jcsd
  3. Sep 9, 2009 #2


    User Avatar
    Science Advisor
    Homework Helper
    Gold Member
    Dearly Missed

    Re: Nationalism

    define nationalism.
  4. Sep 9, 2009 #3


    User Avatar

    Staff: Mentor

    Re: Nationalism

    Sounds like homework - what do you think?
  5. Sep 9, 2009 #4
    Re: Nationalism

    "Nationalism is an infantile disease. It is the measles of mankind."
  6. Sep 9, 2009 #5


    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor

  7. Sep 9, 2009 #6
    Re: Nationalism

    patriotism [n]:
    A social disease placing real estate over moral values
  8. Sep 9, 2009 #7
    Re: Nationalism

    It's not a very good one.

    It's not a very good one.

    It's not a very good one.

    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?
  9. Sep 27, 2009 #8
    Re: Nationalism

    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
    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
    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
  10. Sep 27, 2009 #9
    Re: Nationalism

    In the context of your questions, is personal freedom surrendered?
  11. Sep 28, 2009 #10


    User Avatar
    Science Advisor

    Re: Nationalism

    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.

    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.
  12. Sep 28, 2009 #11
    Re: Nationalism

    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")

  13. Nov 27, 2009 #12
    Re: Nationalism

    No, I do not see the difference and http://blogcritics.org/culture/article/nationalism-vs-patriotism/". Nationalism is more aggressive and patriotism is more passive, but both are seeded in thoughts that ones own nation of origin and its percieved lifestyle is superior to those of other nations/states.

    What you typed means that nationalism is the view of a country, not of your own origin, by someone originating from there, and that patriotism is the feeling about ones own country of origin. That is an incorrect inference.

    There is not a significant enough difference, in your statement, between the words "my" or "your" in my opinion. Both are showing possession of a subjective concept.
    Last edited by a moderator: Apr 24, 2017
  14. Dec 2, 2009 #13
    Re: Nationalism

    This I do not agree with fully. I am a very patriotic American, but I do not believe that America, at least in a cultural sense, is superior to that of other nations. Patriotism is when one holds deep pride in their culture, their people, their nation, etc...it doesn't mean they think they are "better" or "superior" to everyone else.

    Nationalism tends to be more blind and usually has the belief that one's culture and nation are superior to everything else and that it's okay to go out and conquer and destroy other peoples and cultures.

    I forget who said it, but a good definition of patriotism I read is: "Patriotism is not a short and frenzied outburst of emotion but the tranquil and steady dedication of a lifetime."
    Last edited by a moderator: Apr 24, 2017
  15. Dec 8, 2009 #14
    Re: Nationalism

    Agression pursues the unfortunate detractors.

    Very noble, very heroic, very misguided.

    I have no idea what sentiment means.

    It builds character.
  16. Dec 8, 2009 #15
    Re: Nationalism

    Nationalism endorses lack of care, for some, over care for another...asks that we place more importance on our countrymen, then on citizens of Any other nation.

    It asks us to be more or less prejudiced based on which continant you happen to be born or living in.

    I think anything that promotes care for ones country (and its peoples) is good, but to exclude it for the next country is not.

    Therefore since i am of the opinion that nationalism does both...promoting care and degrading care....I am a bit ambivilant? about it, i suppose.

    What i believe is we humans could be far more socially oriented, and less Patriotic....because such has been brainwashed into our beings from an early age, at times, and the course not truly chosen.

    I am not very happy with my country, but am far less happy with countries with less freedoms and more strife.

    I am a person who believes that the worlds problems might be best worked out with a priority based system of solutions. The biggest problems at present being tackled with much care, discussion and networking, without negating the smaller problems, and without warring.

    I am happy that Theodore Roosevelt had the insight to save (for all to savor) many American lands..."natrural resources", as National Parks. I also believe that it is very disquieting that the same goverment will take it upon themselves to twart our resources, without permission from you and I.

    That they will continually amend away our rights, go to war without our permiss, and sell our wild horses for dog food, literally...if & when they so choose.

    Never a patriot, i am at heart, a citizen of a planet.
    I see those innocents being harmed by us in warring, as my human cousins.

    Enjoyed the article posted (link)

    esp this excerpt:

    I am reminded of a press report from years ago where a Polish farmer was interviewed. Due to border changes over the years, his farm had sometimes been part of Poland, then a border adjustment made him part of Russia, and then another change put him back in Poland again. In all this time he had not moved, but the border moved around him, and expected him to grasp a nominal nationalism. The interviewer asked him how he felt about being Polish again. He smiled and said he was happy, as the Russian winters seemed so much worse. The farmer understood how ludicrous the concept of country was. He was a farmer wed to his piece of soil, not the nominal country membership which changed around him
    Last edited: Dec 8, 2009
  17. Dec 8, 2009 #16
    Re: Nationalism

    na·tion·al·ism (nsh-n-lzm, nshn-)
    1. Devotion to the interests or culture of one's nation.
    2. The belief that nations will benefit from acting independently rather than collectively, emphasizing national rather than international goals.
    3. Aspirations for national independence in a country under foreign domination.

    (and for the sake of argument)
    pa·tri·ot·ism (ptr--tzm)
    Love of and devotion to one's country

    Unless your arguing about these definitions from thefreedictionary.com, I think that you will find it hard to promote any particular idealology.

    Fascism resulted from a extreme nationalist movement, but not because of nationalism itself. I think that there are way to many other factors contributing to the rise of these extremeist totalitarian states to simply say "nationalism if fascism".

    I don't really see what argument you can create about patriatism. Of course a totalitarian state will try to control you by driving your patriotism, but saying that patriatism is bad because of this is like saying love is bad because people do bad things because they love their country.

    In regards to the OP question:

    Read the first definition and decide the answer to your questions yourself. We are not here to answer your social studies homework when the intent of the question was to cause you to think for yourself. There is no one right answer. In this thread I am sure you will get as many different answers as there are posters. Try and think of what those questions mean to you, even if you don't fully understand them.
  18. Dec 8, 2009 #17
    Re: Nationalism

    Yes I agree, you might use these ideas to help form your own, but I wouldn't suggest quoting any of this word for word, if it is a school assignment...anyway, a teacher would probably notice it, if you cheated, and besides, you will only be cheating yourself, if you don't form your own ideas on the topic.
Share this great discussion with others via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook