Can race be disassociated with nationalism? Describe how that looks? What are the problems with multinationalism? What are the problems with a melting pot?
If we are talking race, Diane, we have moved into more of "tribalism." I think this technique is used to disguise the real truth - this nationalistic thing is used to hide that class is more important than race in our society. Regardless of whether people call our president a racist, he certainly had no problems considering Oprah for his running mate (which would never happen) for many reasons.
Trump found groups interested and supportive of what was viewed as good for the nation, but it looks like Trump was also considering what was good for billionaires.
These two things are not exclusive, of course.
But economics has proven repeatedly, people tend to look out for those who are a lot like them. In our society, green is a race of its own.
In the meantime, convince people that Bruce Wayne or Tony Starks has taken the White House.
America is fine with multiple races and religions as long as white Anglo Saxon Protestants remain dominant.
Majority groups always defend their majority status. Donald Trump and his supporters are living proof.
Nationalism? Nationalism is a political, social, and economic ideology and movement characterized by 1) the promotion of the interests of a particular nation,
2) especially with the aim of gaining and
3) maintaining the nation's sovereignty over its homeland.
I didn't realize how much farmers depend on export of their produce and products.
RIght now, they need subsidies because of the state of tariffs? I read.
So it is in our interest (economic) to be able to sell products and services outside the US. The economic interest require social interaction with other countries. Sovereignty over our homeland requires political interaction with other countries to watch each others' backs. I am not feeling this nationalism in the rhetoric I am hearing from many who talk about nationalism.
"Nationalism" on a tiny scale:
When I leave home for an extended period I ask my neighbor to keep an eye on my house and he does the same. The neighborhood gets together for a block party once in a while, and when the snow was very deep and the city didn't plow the road we all chipped in to hire someone to do it.
But no one tells me when to cut my grass, no one demands I pay their mortgage for them and no one sets a time schedule for when I will eat supper.
Same with nations; they either work together in many areas or they will suffer because they didn't, but that does not mean that any one nation makes the rules for everyone and no one nation profits exorbitantly from trade. All look out for themselves within that framework and all do well with it. Nationalism.
the first part sounds like neighborhood watch to me. I didn't give my own definition for nationalism. I got it from wikipedia.
2nd paragraph, code enforcement will get on your case if you don't cut your grass.. Wow! Some people get their mortgage paid for them - nice.. Sounds like a good place to cut my taxes. No one tells you when to eat - that sounds like jail!
The last paragraph makes sense. I don't know if it is nationalism.
An informal neighborhood watch, yes. But a formal one classifies as well - people working together to make a better neighborhood.
There is no law in my area about grass height, although many HOA's have requirements. Maybe I should have said that my neighbors don't require me to be unarmed, as the UN does.
It's my concept of nationalism. A part of making a great country is working with others - without that a nation will never achieve what it could with cooperation.
America is a nation of immigrants from around the world so I don't think nationalism here can honestly be associated with race. I guess that's why 'white nationalists' seems an oxymoron, to me.
I think the arguments against the term melting pot are over rated. Primarily because the salad bowl analogy appears to be where the fruits and nuts are saying that they have suffered because the vegetables are the main recognized ingredients without taking into account the fact that the vegetables are happy to share the bowl. Understanding that fruits and nuts enhance the flavor of the whole.
I don't know. Maybe a salad of fruits and nuts, with a smattering of vegetables added in would work as well. But, the truth is then we'd have the dairy whining that they are under represented. Next thing you know, olive oil will make a fuss and vinegar will demand over representation.
:-) Sure would love to have gifs and emojis available.
Hey!!!! What tha? I see! formatting! That's no fun! We should be able to click right here!
Anyway, what are your thoughts on nationalism?
identification with one's own nation and support for its interests, especially to the exclusion or detriment of the interests of other nations.
I support this. While I do not object to helping other nations grow and develop, when push comes to shove my own nation takes priority over all others. It doesn't mean we need to cheat other peoples, but it DOES mean that we are not a mat to be walked on, we are not simply an endless supply of wealth and that we WILL put our needs and wants first. "America First" is a statement of nationalism, and one I approve of.
If America is strong she can take care of her own and continue to help others. Putting her first is good for everyone. The motives of those who continue working to change that should be carefully examined.
There is always someone who wants to be top dog. The US is envied or hated by others which makes us a target. Will nationalism help us with international threats to our existence?
We already have that. When the UN gathers thousands of people and directs them to assault our borders with the intention of entering the country illegally it is a threat to our existence.
And yes, nationalism will help us to survive such attacks.
I'm more concerned about missiles than the borders. We have ground forces.
Then what about trade? I have driven Hondas most of my life.. Th few American made cars I purchased were pretty but did not last more than 5 years. My 2005 has 209K miles and purrs like a kitten.. Do we need imports? The tech firms get many international graduates and experts for the upper echelon and product development side of their companies.
Are you confusing nationalism with isolationism? No one is suggesting we isolate America from the rest of the world; just that in most matters America come first to Americans.
Never had a Honda, but HAVE driven a Volkswagen, a couple of Toyota's, a Nissan as well as several American made (so they say) cars. They all seem about the same to me, given differences in price and quality which was apparent when bought. A Chevy does not, for instance, compare well to a Lexus. In general I drive my cars to around 150,000 miles, and have yet to perform major maintenance (new motor or transmission) on any of them. With increasing quality, though, I'm liable to hit that 200,000 mile mark just as you do.
The last car I sold was a '95 Ford pickup with 175,000 on it and still running like a top. Nothing but oil changes, brakes and such during the time I had it. American manufacturers have had to make longer lasting cars to compete, and they do so. IMO.
I think isolationism could be considered a subset of nationalism. I go back to relationships with other countries. For many reasons US citizens go outside the bounds of the US. Poor Otto Warmbier was on a school trip. Some guy is in Iran and has been given 10 years as a "spy." These are political situations - not our citizens breaking the law. You can be a completely peaceful person and be attacked.
I think the cloud is in the different understandings of what nationalism are.
Christian missionaries go all over the world helping with disaster relief. There are some who feel we should only be helping people in the US. How does that fit into the concept of nationalism?
Unfortunately, Otto ran afoul of the laws of N. Korea (which are basically that the military/police can do whatever they wish to whoever they wish). He assumed that laws were the same everywhere, but they most certainly are not. Nationalism, by NK, then; they run their country as they see fit. As should we.
US citizens should be forbidden from going to places that are considered enemies of the US. We should not consider them as friends because of the humanitarian abuse.
We are a free people: govt does not exert 100% control over our lives (only 85%). That means we are free to go where we wish.
As far as forbidding travel, or labeling another country as an enemy because of what we consider to be a humanitarian issue; when we decide that the rest of the world will decide how we should be have we will have the right to decide for them. So far it hasn't happened, and I pray it never does. We are not the morality police of the world and should not be.
"US citizens should be forbidden from going to places that are considered enemies of the US. We should not consider them as friends because of the humanitarian abuse."
Our citizens are free to both make choices about where to travel and suffer the consequences of any bad choices they make. We are not children who need the government to make such choices for us. There may be certain times prohibitions are necessary, war time for instance, but generally speaking we are grownups and free to make such a choice.
Their are world powers we should be concerned about. According to a report, the Chinese and Russians are both developing hypersonic missiles, capable of traveling five times the speed of sound, making a defense almost impossible. Working out difficulties with these two powers is a must and you have a stronger position when you have allies.
And I'll gladly stand with my American family, regardless of where they are from, to defend this great imperfect land which we have struggled hard to make a home out of. We are often imitated but as of yet, never duplicated. We are unique that way. When we decide to do something - Who knows, we might reach the moon. (Oh yeah, we did that!)
Is there conflict between the US being the leader of the free world and being nationalistic?
I think we are at our best when we decide upon a goal for the nation which we all can stand behind. That was one reason Hitler dreaded the U.S. entering W.W. II as well as the Japanese admiral who said Japan had awaken a sleeping giant - within our borders we are constantly redefining what freedom means, we tend to keep evolving our definitions of freedoms.
This is one reason we are admired and hated. How can we do that without ripping our nation apart?
We are risk takers, innovators, and still hold strong to individualism within a group context. I don't think that will change. Nationalism is saying we are better without any proof of such to be so (the first stages of Nazi Germany, feudal Japan, even theocracies, etc.). By contrast, we have proven we can lead the world when necessary when we set a goal.
And, for all our shortcomings, that's the beauty of America. For all the improvements we need to make we can work to change our circumstances, become a part of the representation, or chill and enjoy the benefits even when times are tough because compared to many parts of the rest of the world, our worst is their best.
That said, melting pot is still a good-to-go phrase. Immigrants need to understand that by coming here they become part of something special. All the immigrants I know do understand that. They need to understand the good, bad, and ugly of our history rather than a watered-down or twisted version of it, need to learn English well to understand that from the beginning good and bad people came to this land, how people of all races fought on both sides of the Civil War, then learned and grew together over time, all so they could make the most of opportunities offered to citizens and be a part of needed improvements. (Sadly we've seen factions trying to undo all the growth we gained from the lessons but that's for another discussion.)
Your salad is also a great way to put it. Immigrants need to be willing to become one with us while adding their positives to us, and many are willing. Together we can build a healthy nation by working together. Yes, the human race is a bunch of fruits and nuts, veggies and seasonings, with a few croutons and meatheads to boot. When we come together in loyalty for a free republic like America we can handle the whiners, complainers, and fuss-makers. We can work together to protect the freedom to protect the innocent, protect law abiding citizens, and protect our government from growing into a a tyranny where there is no freedom for any who do not agree with an agenda that is as far from American as it has ever been.
No, we haven't "arrived" but by refusing to listen to those who only want to divide us from each other so they can increase government control over lives, businesses, education, healthcare, and more we can value the past with an eye on the future, thereby continuing to improve "now" a great deal for both our citizens and people throughout the world (because America has a long record of giving more international aid than any other country, including governmental and private funds/services)
Race has nothing to do with it, but other things have a lot to do with nationalism. For instance, the character of the people of this nation will make or break us. Trusting rich and famous entertainers/fashion icons/etc. shows a lack of character, and giving them power by giving them more money is suicide. Allowing judges to overrule our constitution by not being involved (remaining too ignorant to vote), following a crowd without getting the facts, allowing a biased news media to form our thinking...well, we will get what we deserve if we aren't careful. Like Franklin commented, we should work to hold on to our Republic, and if that's nationalism then we should be nationalists together.
Good thoughts! What do you think of relationships with other countries. As I wrote that, I thought of people being radicalized over the Internet.. What about countries that are trying to get their nukes to travel to the US? What value do we get from alliances from other countries? They share intelligence and seem to have some of the same adversaries.
We should strive to keep our alliances, provided it is productive and beneficial. We should also strengthen new alliances. History has taught that is a great deterrent to war. The great city-state of Athens had to form alliances to defeat Sparta, the Allies had to work together to defeat the Axis powers, etc. If a country knows it will be facing more than one nation in a fight, strategically, the aggressor thinks twice.
Governmental relationships with other countries are too complicated to be generalized, but allying ourselves with countries having similar values helps us fight radicalization and nukes. Ignoring, even denying, that certain countries literally seek our destruction is insanity, but it is what we see from half of our political system, our media/entertainment industry, and the average person who doesn't not want to think things through. Slicing and dicing the motive(s) behind this ignore and deny behavior gives real insight into what is happening in our country.
The old idea of keeping enemies close is a fine but necessary line that must be continually evaluated whether we are talking of individuals, businesses, or governments. How our changeable feelings tempt us to respond to enemies has nothing to do with wisdom in dealing with them. Finding out truth instead of just taking them at their word is crucial to responding wisely to their tactics, one of which is presenting themselves as the opposite of what their purposeful intentions. This concept is another lesson from history that people are willfully ignorant of, choosing rather to follow emotive philosophies.
As long as it is a nationalistic fervor that encompasses all born here. I agree with you. White, Black, etc. nationalistic tendencies strike at the heart of what we believe. We believe first all men (and women) are created equal under the law and we must be willing to stand up for that.
I think it is part of the human condition to have trouble taking pride in 'us' without denigrating 'them'. As an immigrant I see it from both sides. I see my home country making unfair assumptions about the US and also the US making unfair assumptions about my home country. Both are good, but different places. How do humans learn to be diverse without being judgemental?
That would be tough, for if you don't judge that this is better than that why would you leave that in order to have this. Or, put another way, why choose this over that if you don't judge that it is superior?
It's not like we're talking about choosing a red shirt over a blue one, after all, but something far more important to us.
I don't think the issue is saying one is better than the other. People will put you on the defensive by saying negative things. Example: In an MBA class in California, a woman asked where I received my BBA. I told her UALR - in Arkansas. She said, "Oh that's just like a high school degree." People make negative shots like that are nasty.
You know that even happens within the US. When I moved to California, I got a lot of flack from native born Californians.
"How do humans learn to be diverse without being judgmental?"
Defining words is crucial to discussing the question. What you mean by diverse may not be the same as many who use it today. The same is true about the word judgmental. Honest judgements based on truth are necessary, hating others is not.
There are wonderful people in every country, but some of these people are trapped in governments without freedom, for instance, to speak up on behalf of those who are abused or work within the government to make changes for the good of the average person.
No matter the circumstances (country) humans are in, Jesus the Christ is the answer to the human condition. The answer is not found "in" us, "the answer" is the Gospel of Jesus the Christ. The example of Jesus' diversity is profound, but not well understood. His judgements are sound, and safe, because they are rooted in love (another word that requires honest definition if we are to understand the various ways it is used and misused).
When I worked many years in the US, I would be happy, if someone called me a Canadian or an American. Today Corperationism has hijacked nationism and Religion a great deal. I find it more harmful than the good for all. If I had my way, I would abolish the old system and restart a new improve system. Since foresight is not the name of the game. People will be forced to continuous suffering and enslave by economics in North America. Its always comes down to abuses, in which the power of the people will change it for good at 80% consciousness. Rarely ever it will be changed by a Religion or the Government.
There should be a universal description of nationalism before the discussion can be had.
Hey! Haven't talked to you in a while!
Eating, shopping and lying is a national pastime, lo.
I work best with grassroot groups and strong individuals, where most of the real changes start.
Centralized organization breeds greed and clubs you or I are not in.
You are in Canada, right? How do you like the lovefest between Trudeau and TrumP?
It's by far, the worst relationships I have ever seen between a prime minister of Canada and a President of the US. Since the are both puppets, I don't put much stock into how these leaders, effect my life. Because I can't find a better leader for myself than me. I'm happy Trudeau made cannabis legalized. Now my girlfriend has 70% chance of being brain cancer free rather than 3 to 10% chance on chemotherapy. How a US Government owns the rights to cannibis is a law against nature and it enslaves us.
Rather than nationalism, we should change the topic to patriotism, that's a race-neutral word. Anyone can be a patriot no matter what race they are.
Patriotism follows more often to Corperationism. I would prefer individualism, as far as ism's go and let nature be the law and religion.
Some people might equate nationalism with individualism. Narcissists may think it is all about them and what they want.
Ah! I missed this. I think you have a good point! That's why I think nationalism should be defined and understood by all. Otherwise, people support/criticize nationalism based on what they perceive it to be. There is no unity of purpose when there is no clear understanding of the goal or objective.
We should move more to patriotism than nationalism. Patriotism is a universal love that any race can have toward a country and its values.
Unfortunately, there are a few issues with patriotism. Case in point, NFL players kneeling during the anthem. DJT takes it to a whole 'nother level of disrespecting military and the flag, etc. Players feel within their 1st Amendment rights to be able to protest.
by SpanStar 10 years ago
Has diversity benefitted America or has it hindered America. If diversity has benefitted America then why are people so down on differences?
by Grace Marguerite Williams 2 years ago
There are those who are fearful of the concept that societies of the future will become globalized. Although some people will become fanatically nationalistic, nationalism will eventually die out as people become more universalistic in their beliefs i.e. that all humankind is one. Do...
by Jack Lee 2 years ago
This forum discussion is to find solution to our current immigration crisis. The wall is one component but not the only method.The topic of funding this wall is in the news. What is the best way to build the wall?President Trump has said Mexico should pay for it.Practically speaking, who should...
by Sharlee 3 weeks ago
A simple, and honest look at Biden's immigration changes. Soon after Biden entered the Oval Office he had a quest to signed one executive (EO) order after another that would cancel out Trump's immigration policies. 11 million undocumented immigrants will be offered an 8-year path to...
by Grace Marguerite Williams 6 years ago
Why do some Americans see patriotism as an aberration, instead of something to be proud of?
by aka-dj 9 years ago
What do you think of (legal) immigrants to your country?Do you welcome them (in your own mind)? or do you wish they went back to where they came from. I'm not talking about illegals, or refugees.
Copyright © 2021 HubPages Inc. and respective owners. Other product and company names shown may be trademarks of their respective owners. HubPages® is a registered Service Mark of HubPages, Inc. HubPages and Hubbers (authors) may earn revenue on this page based on affiliate relationships and advertisements with partners including Amazon, Google, and others.
HubPages Inc, a part of Maven Inc.
|HubPages Device ID||This is used to identify particular browsers or devices when the access the service, and is used for security reasons.|
|Login||This is necessary to sign in to the HubPages Service.|
|HubPages Traffic Pixel||This is used to collect data on traffic to articles and other pages on our site. Unless you are signed in to a HubPages account, all personally identifiable information is anonymized.|
|Remarketing Pixels||We may use remarketing pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to advertise the HubPages Service to people that have visited our sites.|
|Conversion Tracking Pixels||We may use conversion tracking pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to identify when an advertisement has successfully resulted in the desired action, such as signing up for the HubPages Service or publishing an article on the HubPages Service.|