Why Nationalism?

[Vlerchan]

This isn't another one of those threads where I pick something I don't believe in and then try defend it.

I'm serious. Why in the name of god is Nationalism appealing?

[WaffleSingSong]

In my idea, the reason why Nationalism is so important to people is that it seems to create a sense of identity with people in a seemingly clear way. Finding who you are is hard, very hard. If society, more particularly the society you were born in, said that your this "nationality" from birth, it gets kinda hard-wired in you, and you start to become rather fond of the idea of being apart of this "Nation." It creates a sense of self, and does so by also seemingly binding you to other people in this common creed for the things that are right in the world and against all the "evil." Cosmopolitan ideals seem dangerous and strange to these people as believing in said ideals seems like putting yourself in a stormy sea of placelessness. It could also be seen as being a traitor, for nationalistic people who have a "all for one, one for all" mentality could see it as being one step closer for the said nation to descend into anarchy for the persona of the nation.

Another reason why nationalism is popular with people is I think some people find it hard to really separate the term "nation" and "state." Nation being a cultural cluster of people, state being a political institution created by people to govern themselves. Some people see this as interchangeable and thus brings a stronger sense of both individual and collective identity when said nation's abstract ideals are being practiced in a physical way thus proving the legitimacy of the ideology of the nation.

This is my two cents on an idea on why nationalism is popular, but honestly im right with the OP on this one :P.

[fairmaiden]

I may sound weird, but I feel like there are different levels to nationalism. I don't mind mild nationalism, eg. being very proud of your nationality, however what I don't agree with is extreme nationalism; which is what StormFront is all about.

[Canadian Dream]

I think it's because humans in general have a tendency to seperate into groups, thus creating a sense of collective identity (hence why countries were formed in the first place). Finding a sense of belonging to a group helps someone feel protected, like having a gain in strength, because when that someone is alone, they believe they aren't able to face big problems on their own. For example, an individual may find a sense of belonging to a country in order to face competition, in some cases other countries. Individuals may also be striving to achieve a sense of nationalism because humans tend to naturally look and strive for a sense of belonging. There is also a relation between someone's values and nationalism, in the sense one will identify themselves better with a country that conforms to their values. Individuals may also be motivated by personnal gain by achieving nationalism. For example, the world's view (for some) of the United States as an international superpower may give an American citizen a sense of pride and achievement through the perceptions of others.

Anyways, my response is a bit all over the place, but the general idea is that there are plenty of reasons why nationalism is appealing to individuals.

[phuckphace]

oh goody, a thread with my name on it!

the main goal of nationalism is the preservation of social cohesiveness (Einigkeit) which in turn allows for the accumulation of social capital, which can only be achieved through long periods of time and stability. without that Einigkeit, atomization and disorder limits the creation of new social capital, and the society begins to burn through the old capital faster than it can be replaced [You are here!]

that's the short version. I don't doubt I've left everyone with more questions than answers.

[Vlerchan]

I understand the 'in-group/out-group' and the 'sense-of-belonging' arguments.

I'm wondering about why the nation in particular is elevated to such importance within these arguments though.

---

oh goody, a thread with my name on it!
It was you I was waiting on to answer all honesty.

the main goal of nationalism is the preservation of social cohesiveness (Einigkeit) which in turn allows for the accumulation of social capital, which can only be achieved through long periods of time and stability. without that Einigkeit, atomization and disorder limits the creation of new social capital, and the society begins to burn through the old capital faster than it can be replaced [You are here!]

that's the short version. I don't doubt I've left everyone with more questions than answers.
Right. A few points. I'm looking for more an opinion on this than an argument.

---

Is there a reason why the nation is viewed as the prime unit of association here? Is it for convenience - lots of nations have already formed within states - or is their some greater purpose? If we want to get reductionist I would imagine their would me a much greater homogeneity amongst the clan before your local communities, etc., and so if we were being consistent on that point nationalist should be adopting a localised approach.

From reading Alain de Benoist (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alain_de_Benoist) - you'd like him; maybe, he does blame Christianity for individualism, so. - I realise that the reductionist approach isn't something that holds across the Right. De Benoist for example considers himself a Breton first, a European second, and a Frenchman third. So obviously, homogeneity whilst an influence isn't of principal importance; at least here. I do wonder why that is though.

---

I further wonder what makes ethnic or cultural identification the identification that is of primary importance. I've mentioned before how I'm an internationalist and internationalism presupposes some form of cultural association. So I don't have a problem with cultural association. On the contrary I think that a multiplicity of cultures is one of the most important bulwarks against societal stagnation: certain cultures are more inclined towards certain activities and achievements - and then the interaction between cultures allows us to go even beyond that; not to mention the diversification of experiences that such also offers.

I still elevate class as the most important form of identification though - I'll refer to this as superidentification (SI) from here out. It's undeniable that class interest coincide to a much greater extent than national interests. In the beginning Americans identified at the broadest with their (imagined post-class) individualism and mutual desire to pursue happiness. I consider that a pretty oxymoronic culture before anyone raises the point. Then there's multicultural liberal nationalist states likes Canada who superidentify with their political identities (being Canadian) and that works for them.

So I would like to know why you superidentify with your nation (which is other WASPs right?)

---

I also question your hypothesis.

I don't understand how you burn through social capital given the nature of social capital.

I've also seen mixed results when it comes with identifying multiculturalism with diminishing social capital. It seems to have more to do with resident nationalism prior to the arrival of immigrants than anything else. That's to say that it's nationalism that fuels nationalism.

But since I'm more hoping to learn I'm cool to defer these points to some other time.

[ImCoolBeans]

I may sound weird, but I feel like there are different levels to nationalism. I don't mind mild nationalism, eg. being very proud of your nationality, however what I don't agree with is extreme nationalism; which is what StormFront is all about.

I agree, I don't mind nationalism in small doses.

Nationalism is OK in my book when it's not too extreme -- e.g. showing pride in your heritage, or ethnically identifying with your country/home country. However, once it is used as a tool to manipulate peoples' opinions or sway views it has become too extreme. Extreme nationalism is also not a good thing because it has the influence to justify wars, and crimes against humanity.

It is appealing because it gives people a sense of belonging, and is something to identify with large numbers of people on, even people who you would not normally associate with, or even agree with.

[Dennis98]

Because retarded humans need some argument for killing each other , that's point of nationalism .

[Miserabilia]

I've never really got it.

It's the same as sport teams.
The players switch, the managers (or whatever) switch, coatches switch, most of the players aren't from the region of the team...
Eventualy, what's the point? Who are you rooting for?
You're rooting for nothing more than a flag, an icon.
I guess it's the same with nationalism; it doesn't make that much sense but there must be some unconscious social appeal to it.

[Syrum]

In my idea, the reason why Nationalism is so important to people is that it seems to create a sense of identity with people in a seemingly clear way. Finding who you are is hard, very hard. If society, more particularly the society you were born in, said that your this "nationality" from birth, it gets kinda hard-wired in you, and you start to become rather fond of the idea of being apart of this "Nation." It creates a sense of self, and does so by also seemingly binding you to other people in this common creed for the things that are right in the world and against all the "evil." Cosmopolitan ideals seem dangerous and strange to these people as believing in said ideals seems like putting yourself in a stormy sea of placelessness. It could also be seen as being a traitor, for nationalistic people who have a "all for one, one for all" mentality could see it as being one step closer for the said nation to descend into anarchy for the persona of the nation.

Another reason why nationalism is popular with people is I think some people find it hard to really separate the term "nation" and "state." Nation being a cultural cluster of people, state being a political institution created by people to govern themselves. Some people see this as interchangeable and thus brings a stronger sense of both individual and collective identity when said nation's abstract ideals are being practiced in a physical way thus proving the legitimacy of the ideology of the nation.

This is my two cents on an idea on why nationalism is popular, but honestly im right with the OP on this one :P.


Mostly what this guy said, but nationalism has played... Well, for example the Nazi party of National Socalism, and if your people are patriotic... Welp, you can get quite far with nationalism. For example my country (Russia) is VERY nationalist, so when the EU and America put sanctions on us, we just scoff. Though, some do hurt us. We're the most nationalist people ever, and stubborn... Or drunk, but still nationalist. Nationalism does give off a since of identity.

[Vlerchan]

However, once it is used as a tool to manipulate peoples' opinions or sway views it has become too extreme.
I don't think it's reasonable to expect people to form an intimate attachment to something and then that intimate attachment not working to mould their views.

[DoodleSnap]

Taking a want for belonging as granted for most people, I guess nationalism is an easy option for the required group of belonging. My hypothesis is that most people feel proud about where they are from, and historically a nation or kingdom would be fairly homogenous, so your birthplace would fairly well represent your ethnic group/culture. Also, a nation can be fairly easily molded during reform by those in power to represent a certain ideology, and thus making pride of nation synonymous with pride in that specific ideology. Anyway, that is my guess.

[Wyatt 13]

I am proudly american I am nationalist I love and support my country and I will be a MARINE.

[Capto]

I don't feel as if I am capable of answering this question because I don't have a clear definition, despite cursory research, on what exactly nationalism refers to. I have yet to determine a sound definition that pleases me.

[ImCoolBeans]

I don't think it's reasonable to expect people to form an intimate attachment to something and then that intimate attachment not working to mould their views.

That is a good point, however, maybe I could have worded my response a little more clearly. I think it's ok to celebrate your heritage and nationality, for example, the Puerto Rican Day Parade in NYC, or celebrating your country's independence day, days of memorial -- I don't think it's ok for the Führer to hold a rally in town square pumping people up to exterminate non-aryan race members and using nationalism to bring people on board. The difference between extreme nationalism and more meek, or harmless nationalism.

[Gamma Male]

It's appealing because the human brain has been hardwired, after millions of years of evolution, to be tribalistic. It's how we survived. We supported and fought for our tribe while crushing and competing with other tribes. It was only very, very recently that we began to overcome our nature and form more mutualistic societies.

You can see it in things like intense dedication to a certain, race, religion, and yes, nation.

Some people rely more on instinct and emotion more than rationality. Those people tend to exert this need to belong to a tribe more and become more nationalistic, or racist, or something less harmful like a supporting a certain sports team.

[Pilyk]

I think there is a sharp contrast between patriotism (to be proud and respectful toward one's country), and nationalism (believe in one's nation superiority upon the other). A patriotic just like is country but may like other countries and people when in theory a nationalist will be more militant and won't consider all men equal.

[Atom]

I am personally a strong adversary of patriotism and especially nationalism. Having said that, why is nationalism appealing? It is in human nature, it gives people a sense of purpose, stability, security, safety, status, a sense of self-esteem. I, however, am not very fluent in this topic (because it doesn't really interest me) so I would suggest going through Daniel Druckman's short essay "Nationalism, Patriotism, and Group Loyalty: A Social Psychological Perspective." You can skip right to the conclusion if you want.