Nationalism - A Bad Thing?

[Sargent_Peach]

So, after reading the thread by Uncle Kenny about removing "under God" and "in God we trust" I got to thinking. Is there is a debate that we can have that more people would care about . After reading a number of posts by some of my fellow debaters, I got the feeling that Nationalism was a bad thing. Now I am a history major, and I know that Nationalism was a cause of WWI, along with Militarism, Imperialism, and Alliances.

My question: Is Nationalism really a bad thing?

Nationalism from dictionary.com

1. National spirit or aspirations.
2. Devotion and loyalty to one's own nation
3. Devotion to the interests or culture of one's nation.
4. The desire for national advancement or independence.

I really don't feel that it is a bad thing, and I can't see how it would hurt OUR Nation, or any nation at that.

 

[snex]

the problems with nationalism are the same as the problems with religion. you are devoting yourself to completely arbitrary things. a nationalist supports george bush because george bush is the president. a patriot opposes george bush because george bush is a moron and making our country worse.

 

[Gamer4Fire]

Nationalism is like religion. When used by good people it brings them together to do good things that would be beyond a single person. And when used by bad people can be used to crush and subjugate those that disagree with them.

Like most ideologies, nationalism can be a force for good, bad or indifference. If you believed in a libertarian nationalism you'd fight for everyone's right to do whatever they wanted, as long as you didn't have to deal with it. What they do is irrelevant and you wouldn't care.

If you believed in the great christian nation, you'd use your will to coerce the masses to your belief and bring forth the Abrahamic laws, the fall and rise of zion and ultimately the apocalypse.

If you believed in the sovereign nation, you'd go about improving everything you could in this country from the schools to the public services. You'd either enslave or extirpate any foreign influences that didn't serve the United States. The greatness of America would be your only ambition and would make this a really nifty place to live for us citizens.

As you can see, each has its pros and cons. To simply state that national is just bad is too simple a question for such a complex idea.

 

[lonejedi]

the problems with nationalism are the same as the problems with religion. you are devoting yourself to completely arbitrary things. a nationalist supports george bush because george bush is the president. a patriot opposes george bush because george bush is a moron and making our country worse.

Patriotism and Nationalism are basically one in the same.

Patriotism -devoted love, support, and defense of one's country; national loyalty.

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/patriotism

And your example of being a patriot is a very loose and general one. The definition of patriot to you is someone who opposes George Bush, while to someone else, it could someone who supports Bush. We could get into a big discussion about this, but that's not what this debate is about.

I think, Nationalism, used in the right context is good, but used to an extreme is bad. It just depends on what country you live in. A country that is full of pols, like poland, will easily unite for a cause, because they are of one background. But a country like the U.S. would have greater difficulty in establishing nationalism, because of the different groups that are there.

 

[Digital Watches]

Patriotism and Nationalism are basically one in the same.

Patriotism -devoted love, support, and defense of one's country; national loyalty.

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/patriotism

And your example of being a patriot is a very loose and general one. The definition of patriot to you is someone who opposes George Bush, while to someone else, it could someone who supports Bush. We could get into a big discussion about this, but that's not what this debate is about.

I think, Nationalism, used in the right context is good, but used to an extreme is bad. It just depends on what country you live in. A country that is full of pols, like poland, will easily unite for a cause, because they are of one background. But a country like the U.S. would have greater difficulty in establishing nationalism, because of the different groups that are there.

SEMANTICS, sir. Dictionary definitions are only half the battle in distinction between nigh-synonymous terms, and in this case, Nationalism is distinguished from Patriotism in that it carries a connotation of being a nigh-religious, inflexible, basically blind version of what both terms are expressing. To sum it up, here's a slogan oft-used near WW1, which defines Nationalism all the way down to nuance and connotation: "My country, right or wrong."

I also disagree that nationalism can ever be inherently good. Sure, it can work out fine, but the risks of giving the government of a country an overly-controllable population always outweigh the risks of dissent. Whereas patriotism is love for one's country, Nationalism is unconditional love and obedience for one's country, something that one should never ever have, as history has made all too clear on numerous occasions.

 

[Kalypso]

Anything taken to a certain level is bad. What is wrong is ignorance, hatred and warmongering, not Nationalism. Without Nationalism, America would be a much ****tier place.

The crusades don't make religion a bad thing. They make stupid people a bad thing.