The Scourge Of Nationalism.

What is the point of Nationalism? Isn't it the root cause of most conflict in the World? It's so petty and small-minded. It's one World isn't it? Just one tiny planet out there in the Universe,and yet Governments are prepared to risk everything and go to war over arbitrarily drawn borders and some notion of being different to foreigners.

I think the World would be a lot better off without countries.And yet many would label me a supporter of globalism and New World Order for stating my opinion.I just think the notion of Nation States is childish and old fashioned,and helps no one.

Do scientists and astronauts adhere to such old-fashioned notions? I'm with them,I am a citizen of the World.

 

World solution or pyramid scheme?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8lxtwCkks0s&t=8s

 

I consider myself to have given away my sovereignty the moment I was branded with a National Insurance number.

 

I don't like nationalism, globalism, or any other -ism.

Basically the purpose of nationalism is to create an us vs. them mentality which is beneficial for a country's ruling elite when it comes time to send people off to fight and die in wars for profit.

 

na·tion·al·ism
ˈnaSH(ə)nəˌlizəm/
noun
patriotic feeling, principles, or efforts.
synonyms: patriotism, patriotic sentiment, flag-waving, xenophobia, chauvinism, jingoism
"their extreme nationalism was frightening"
an extreme form of this, especially marked by a feeling of superiority over other countries.
plural noun: nationalisms
advocacy of political independence for a particular country.

I find it to be quite the conundrum. It's like you want to be all about patriotism and furthering the progress of your country, protecting your country and freedom, but it gets a little bit muddy where you have to become the authority on the matter. Like, if it's up to you, what is your position on foreign policy? or immigration?

When it comes to the politics of interacting with other cultures I'd like to feel like we're ahead of the game here in the United States (can't speak for other countries really). Of course it's all over the news that the new administration may have a difference of opinion on this matter. Well pooh.

 

The largest manufactured export of the wealthiest country in the world is weapons and here you are asking, "Why can't we all just get along?"

 

The last major wave of nationalism produced Hitler

Now we're seeing another tide of nationalism in the US and Europe and I fear what it will produce. Nationalism is dangerous.

 

Didn't John Lennon say "Imagine no countries,no possessions too",or something,in his song "Imagine"? I personally don't have the answer.I'm just posing the question.I feel though that if we are going to meet and overcome the challenges we face as Humankind we need to try and come together as one World.It may take a hundred years.When you see American and Russian astronauts working together on the International Space Station,during this period of cold relations between the two countries,it really makes me think.

Sometimes I wonder if all this Nationalism isn't just cooked up by those in top positions of power.To keep people divided.To keep us as sheep.It certainly suits the corporate agenda.It keeps the politicians in jobs too.And the media.And I personally am neither left or right wing.I think left or right is a false dichotomy.

 

The difference now is that the US is the unchallenged empire of the world with a military equal to the next six or seven largest combined and the dollar underscoring practically every economy in the world. While nuclear war remains a threat which Putin went out of his way to remind us of, world war and attempted genocide are not serious threats. What is a serious threat is that, like the Roman empire, the US public will soon welcome a dictatorship to keep the oligopolies in check. Americans love to talk about freedom and democracy, yet, they've allowed and encouraged the oligopolies to suspend their constitutional rights indefinitely and turn the US into a police state with only the barest vestiges of democracy left on the national level. Inevitably, they'll get sick of all the corruption and frustrated with their inability to actually change anything and the first conquering hero to return from some war will be put on a pedestal and worshiped as their savior.

Ironically, they may be their savior because the American public no longer even knows the meaning of democracy, however, once they start down that road we could easily end up with the likes of Caligula and the worst of the Roman emperors.

 

Obama was preaching about Corbyn the other day. What a fucking joke. You can judge all politicians around the world by their opinion on Corbyn and Sanders.

 

Some wit remarked that as soon as the Soviet Union fell apart freedom in the free world became much more expensive. There are no left wing politics in the US anymore and Obama can spout all the rhetoric he wants, but he is preaching to the choir.

 

Nationalism doesn't have to be such a negative thing. Cultures are bound by their location to some extent, and it is possible to represent one's culture without hating another's.

I personally like the idea of separate nations getting along more than I like the idea of one single global nation trying to acclimate itself to itself Trying to normalize itself to fit one idea of what humanity should be like. Rather, I see separate nation states working in harmony as the ideal. I like the fact that there's a Britain, a US, a Germany, a France, a Spain, etc. I think it's cool.

 

My country is better than your country!

 

This isnt really nationalism

Nationalism is more the belief that your country and culture is superior to others, as well as the demonization of anyone who believes differently

Nationalism is generally characterized by empty gestures such as reverence for the flag or other such patriotic symbols (freedom fries, anyone?) And usually excludes any minority race/ethnic group/culture coexisting in the country - which is what, in my opinion, makes it so dangerous.

Like all the Trumpeters trumpeting about how this is THEIR country now, they're the winners and the "other" side are losers. Not saying all Trumpeters are like this, but I have seen enough in various parts of the internet say exactly that - "this is OUR country now" to be a little freaked out by it..like, this is still my country too, buddies.

 

That sounds a bit more like jingoism. While there may be some overlap, jingoism is nationalism in it's ugliest form.

 

I'm not familiar with it, but yeah there are definitely varying degrees of nationalism

 

I think nationalism originally had its positive aspects in helping to overcome more parochial attachments like tribalism and localism. Nationalism is a feeling of community with strangers in a country based on a perception of shared language and culture. The Jews developed a sense of being Jewish in relation to the Assyrian, Babylonian, Egyptian, Greek and Roman occupiers. The Greeks developed a sense of being Greek in relation to the Persians. The French developed a sense of being French under Napoleon, who fosterd public schools for that purpose. But even today, in France you can pass by little plots of land flying the flag of some obscure principality of die-hards who resist the national identity.

Evolution gave us and some other mammals empathy and reciprocal altruism, but those work best with others who share our genes and are similar to us in appearance and habits. A problem societies had to face in expanding beyond primitive villages and hunting bands was how to transfer these sentiments to large communities of strangers. Two ways of accomplishing that were religion and nationalism. I'd describe nationalism as a secular religion in which the object of devotion is the ethno-national community. Like religion, it has basically two sets of dynamics: personal and societal. From a personal standpoint, it functions to gratify psychological needs for identity and belonging, which become stronger as the more personal, face-to-face relationships weaken in larger collectivities. From a societal standpoint, it functions to motivate and mobilize collective action. The downside, of course (which is also a problem for religion) is that it tends to lead to distrust and rejection of outsiders. And as in the case of religion, there are varying degrees of this, from the tolerant to the xenophobic.

I think some of the dynamics at play can be seen in the phenomenon of "supertribalism" in Africa--the tendency of Africans to develop "tribal" attachments to much greater ethnic units as they move into the cities and compete with other ethnic groups. In Nigeria, for example, the Yoruba, Hausa, and Ibo, who are often considered the largest "tribes" in the country, did not exist before colonialism and urbanization. As Africans moved from their villages into the cities, they encountered lots of strangers. Some were radically different from themselves, others not so much. And folks began identifying with the ones whom they perceived to be "not so much" different from themselves--usually those who shared the same language and cultural similarities. Whether or not these people originally thought of themselves in these terms, they were perceived by others as being part of that grouping, and soon took on that identity. This had material advantages to individuals, for the same reasons prisoners find it advantageous to identify with Hispanic, African-American or Aryan prison gangs. And of course there were the politicians who were able to use these differences to advantage. In Nigeria, before the civil war, they were able to whip up hatred against the Ibo, who were the most advantaged in education and socioeconomic status. In Rwanda, Hutu politicians organized a genocide of the tall, statuesque Tutsi, whom they branded "cockroaches". (So poignantly portrayed in the movie Hotel Rwanda). And in the United States, we have the Donald and politicians of the AltRight.

 

Nationalism is fine so long as you don't attack anybody.

 

Even the ancient sages agreed with the above conclusion.

The Avatar Rama had stated in the ancient Yoga Vasishta," All countries in the world are territories of evil. "

Similarly Jiddu Krishnamurti had stated thus, “When you call yourself an Indian or a Muslim or a Christian or a European, or anything else, you are being violent. Do you see why it is violent? Because you are separating yourself from the rest of mankind. When you separate yourself by belief, by nationality, by tradition, it breeds violence. So a man who is seeking to understand violence does not belong to any country, to any religion, to any political party or partial system; he is concerned with the total understanding of mankind.”


It is when man is based on a lower state of consciousness that duality sets in , and he starts dividing things on the basis of race, religion, creed, nationality, linguistics, gender , ideology and so on....

Such divisions obviously foster conflict and disharmony.

At a higher state of consciousness he is able to easily perceive unity in every thing, and peace, love and harmony comes up easily.

Unfortunately the present educational system all over the world is purely materialistic and the spiritual education is primitive and inadequate. Hence while intellectually the present world generation is quite well-developed in comparison to previous generations , in terms of consciousness he is quite underdeveloped.

This is the reason why there is increasing unhappiness even in the midst of increasing materialist comforts.

Duality creates walls and cuts oneself off from the whole ,which is unnatural and unhealthy in the long run , and is bound to have repercussions.