Nationalism isn’t something evil inherently, I like to remind of the “singing revolution”, a peaceful separatists movements of the baltic states to split ties with the soviet occupying force:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baltic_Way
But it can very quickly turn into something evil if utilized by powerhungry regimes
Nationalism as a political ideology and nationalism as advocacy for independence of people sharing national identity that isn’t broadly recognized as official nation are two different things sharing the same name. Nationalism as political ideology is inherently evil, as it puts interests of an artifical construct above interests of people, with specific attention put to ingroup and outgroup dynamics. Separatists movements aren’t inherently evil, with the desire of liberation being usually something everyone can stand behind, but if those movements co-opt the nationalist ideology, then they may be classified as evil in my book. Or evil-er. There are no perfect victims and such.
I feel like it’s a meaningful distinction to make.
I disagree with this argument solely for the fact that nationalism as a FUNCTION arises out of a desire to form a cohesive cultural identity that can be defined and can ostensibly provide context for people’s place in a society; something that occurs across the scale of human settlements, but which in our current age manifests primarily in association to a nation-state. I think the point you’re trying to make is that nationalism as an IDEOLOGY is weak and highly prone to exploitation, leading to its broad application by people with evil intentions.
Also, a reminder that the Confederacy was definitively a separatist movement.
Nationalism as a function, to use your terms, doesn’t have to specifically be a result of a desire for cultural identity. It might, but when speaking of it as a function it has a narrower meaning and doesn’t have to carry additional baggage like that, though it may often imply it. When speaking of nationalism as ideology, it definitely fits my definition of evil, by putting artifical values above the wellbeing of people, which nationalism does by definition. Following that logic, nationalism as function isn’t necessarily evil (though it may be if you flavor it with racism or such, like Confederation did), while nationalism as ideology necessarily is. I’m not sure what specifically you were disagreeing with, so I hope I made my point clearer.
Nationalism - identification with one’s own nation and support for its interests, especially to the exclusion or detriment of the interests of other nations.
Patriotism - the quality of being patriotic; devotion to and vigorous support for one’s country.
Of course. That is how nationalism works.
Nationalism isn’t something evil inherently, I like to remind of the “singing revolution”, a peaceful separatists movements of the baltic states to split ties with the soviet occupying force:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baltic_Way
But it can very quickly turn into something evil if utilized by powerhungry regimes
Nationalism as a political ideology and nationalism as advocacy for independence of people sharing national identity that isn’t broadly recognized as official nation are two different things sharing the same name. Nationalism as political ideology is inherently evil, as it puts interests of an artifical construct above interests of people, with specific attention put to ingroup and outgroup dynamics. Separatists movements aren’t inherently evil, with the desire of liberation being usually something everyone can stand behind, but if those movements co-opt the nationalist ideology, then they may be classified as evil in my book. Or evil-er. There are no perfect victims and such.
I feel like it’s a meaningful distinction to make.
I disagree with this argument solely for the fact that nationalism as a FUNCTION arises out of a desire to form a cohesive cultural identity that can be defined and can ostensibly provide context for people’s place in a society; something that occurs across the scale of human settlements, but which in our current age manifests primarily in association to a nation-state. I think the point you’re trying to make is that nationalism as an IDEOLOGY is weak and highly prone to exploitation, leading to its broad application by people with evil intentions.
Also, a reminder that the Confederacy was definitively a separatist movement.
Nationalism as a function, to use your terms, doesn’t have to specifically be a result of a desire for cultural identity. It might, but when speaking of it as a function it has a narrower meaning and doesn’t have to carry additional baggage like that, though it may often imply it. When speaking of nationalism as ideology, it definitely fits my definition of evil, by putting artifical values above the wellbeing of people, which nationalism does by definition. Following that logic, nationalism as function isn’t necessarily evil (though it may be if you flavor it with racism or such, like Confederation did), while nationalism as ideology necessarily is. I’m not sure what specifically you were disagreeing with, so I hope I made my point clearer.
Nationalism vs Patriotism
Nationalism - identification with one’s own nation and support for its interests, especially to the exclusion or detriment of the interests of other nations.
Patriotism - the quality of being patriotic; devotion to and vigorous support for one’s country.