Has Nationalism become a bad word?

SteveG wrote: Err.. that's a beautiful system, but would go over in Western countries like a lead balloon. I said I saw no viable and doable alternative. Key word being doable.

SteveG wrote: Spaciousmind wrote: So far in these posts the uses of "ism". THE NEGS? Nationalism, Patriotism, Socialism, Nazism, Existentialism, Expansionism, Isolationism, Illuminism, postmodernism, antidisestablishmentarianism, protectionism THE DUNNO YET? Individualism (hmmm.. not sure were to place this one yet... one for one and one for one... or does it mean one for all and all for one?.  It's a head scratcher) THE PROS? Optimism? Humanism? Don't kid yourself with Patriotism or its baby child nationalism.  It has a rich history of brutality.  Why?  Because the manipulators of this world use it very nicely to build walls, Brexit oneself into a cocoon, to incite hate and jealousy and so on.  Those are just examples in your back door no need to search down the street or across the river. From the Merriam-Webster dictionary on Patriotism: There is hardly any judicious man but knoweth, that it was neither learning, piety, nor  patriotism that perswaded any of that Nation to Presbytery…. —C.N., Reasons Why the Supreme Authority of the Three Nations (for the time) is not in the Parliament, 1653 There hath been in London, and repairing to it, for these many yeers together, a knot of Scotish bankers, collybists, or coinecoursers, of traffickers in Merchandise to and againe, and of men of other professions, who…hug all unto themselves; that, for no respect of vertue, honor, kinred,  patriotism, or whatever else…whereof those quomodocunquizing clusterfists and rapacious varlets have given of late such cannibal-like proofs, by their inhumanity and obdurate carriage towards some (whose shoos-strings they are not worthy to unty) that were it not that a more able pen then mine, will assuredly not faile to jerk them on all sides…. —Thomas Urquhart, Ekskybalauron, 1652 Pretty clear examples from as far back as the 17th century were the use of it is used to incite and hurt your bones.  Don't know what happened to these Scottish Bankers but whatever happened was probably not very good for them, but I do know a few years earlier very similarly all the Jews (moneylenders) who went for protection to a castle (can't remember which one) ended being locked into it and ended up mass suiciding rather than being hung drawn and quartered by the mob, who btw were incited by the King to avoid paying back the money he had borrowed and owed from them.  I think this was your first Pogrom. Witches burned at stake, ship off to America religious undesirables and so on and on and on. Yep these words are bad as they have a rich history of use to manipulate and to incite murder, destruction and humiliation of others. You just can't camouflage their history of use to incite the population that you want to control with some cleverly worded modern arguments, these words are tarnished beyond redemption. I don't see a single post here that is of the opinion that nationalism is without it's inherent evils both present and past. I also fail to see a single sensible alterative stated by anyone, who's posted so far, as a viable and doable replacement.

Errr.. I had stated earlier that" I have been an advocate of direct democracy, where educated people decide by referendum the correct course of collective action. Like in Switzerland , a notoriously rabid nationalist/patriotic nation". Imagine that! Proud , efficient , social caring and rich , the people get to decide not some representative politico who is lobbying for his own agenda. 

It is quite amusing to see that some of the strongest proponents of anti-nationalism in this thread are the most militant with their words.  If that is the case, one wonders how anti-nationalism could be trusted to give us a better world than the one we have. Maybe stop deluding yourselves that the solution lies in obliterating this or that 'ism' and accept that humanity in and of itself is deeply flawed and that we can only keep striving for progress in the face of these flaws. 

Shadowyzard wrote: SteveG wrote: We had 4 pages of a civil discussion between left and right viewpoints up until this post. Congratulations for breaking the peace. Oh really? Politeness can be something that which is hypocrisy, something which I entertain myself with... Seeing people pretending to hide their hostility. Really a funny thing. I was just stating my opinion in an accurate and honest manner. And yes, sometimes I prefer not to be polite while doing so. No "sorry" for that.

I didn't expect anything less from you. Or better, in fact.

Spaciousmind wrote: So far in these posts the uses of "ism". THE NEGS? Nationalism, Patriotism, Socialism, Nazism, Existentialism, Expansionism, Isolationism, Illuminism, postmodernism, antidisestablishmentarianism, protectionism THE DUNNO YET? Individualism (hmmm.. not sure were to place this one yet... one for one and one for one... or does it mean one for all and all for one?.  It's a head scratcher) THE PROS? Optimism? Humanism? Don't kid yourself with Patriotism or its baby child nationalism.  It has a rich history of brutality.  Why?  Because the manipulators of this world use it very nicely to build walls, Brexit oneself into a cocoon, to incite hate and jealousy and so on.  Those are just examples in your back door no need to search down the street or across the river. From the Merriam-Webster dictionary on Patriotism: There is hardly any judicious man but knoweth, that it was neither learning, piety, nor  patriotism that perswaded any of that Nation to Presbytery…. —C.N., Reasons Why the Supreme Authority of the Three Nations (for the time) is not in the Parliament, 1653 There hath been in London, and repairing to it, for these many yeers together, a knot of Scotish bankers, collybists, or coinecoursers, of traffickers in Merchandise to and againe, and of men of other professions, who…hug all unto themselves; that, for no respect of vertue, honor, kinred,  patriotism, or whatever else…whereof those quomodocunquizing clusterfists and rapacious varlets have given of late such cannibal-like proofs, by their inhumanity and obdurate carriage towards some (whose shoos-strings they are not worthy to unty) that were it not that a more able pen then mine, will assuredly not faile to jerk them on all sides…. —Thomas Urquhart, Ekskybalauron, 1652 Pretty clear examples from as far back as the 17th century were the use of it is used to incite and hurt your bones.  Don't know what happened to these Scottish Bankers but whatever happened was probably not very good for them, but I do know a few years earlier very similarly all the Jews (moneylenders) who went for protection to a castle (can't remember which one) ended being locked into it and ended up mass suiciding rather than being hung drawn and quartered by the mob, who btw were incited by the King to avoid paying back the money he had borrowed and owed from them.  I think this was your first Pogrom. Witches burned at stake, ship off to America religious undesirables and so on and on and on. Yep these words are bad as they have a rich history of use to manipulate and to incite murder, destruction and humiliation of others. You just can't camouflage their history of use to incite the population that you want to control with some cleverly worded modern arguments, these words are tarnished beyond redemption.

I don't see a single post here that is of the opinion that nationalism is without it's inherent evils both present and past. I also fail to see a single sensible alterative stated by anyone, who's posted so far, as a viable and doable replacement.

Edited by SteveG - April 13 2021 at 05:38

suitkees wrote: When I first saw this thread title I immediately thought that it would raise a lot of confusion in terminology, and I think I'm not mistaken. Their is a big difference between nationalism (as in the sense of the wiki-definition given above - a political ideology) and patriotism, protectionism, isolationism, self-determination, sovereignty, a strive for independence, a feeling of belonging to... Some hide themselves behind one of these latter words, but do adhere to the nationalist ideology. Others don't hesitate to call themselves nationalist, when they mean patriot, being a protectionist, or whatever else than the nationalism itself. I don't think the SNP nor Plaid Cymru would claim to be nationalists in the sense of the wiki definition given here above (e.g. they would not have been in the group of the Greens in the European Parliament, where they were before Brexit). The UK is a rather particular context for this word, where it mainly means autonomy (in whatever form) regarding England. Regarding this definition (or the one by the Encyclopedia Britannica if you want it more thorough), if there are positive aspects to this ideology, they either translate to those other notions I mentioned above, or they are something of the past. Today's nationalism, as a political ideology - and especially in our modern globalized world - is in my opinion a despicable ideology, for all the racism, discrimination, superiority feeling, inequalities, apartheid, uniform culture etc. etc. that it induces. If this is the simplistic route, then I take it without hesitation. A positive alternative? Humanism, I guess.

The reason that I left my opening post and introductory question without suppling the standard definition of nationalism as follows

suitkees wrote: A positive alternative? Humanism, I guess.

But our "friend" that asked for an alternative is a misanthrope. Just look at his signature here. 

I don't think the SNP nor Plaid Cymru would claim to be nationalists in the sense of the wiki definition given here above (e.g. they would not have been in the group of the Greens in the European Parliament, where they were before Brexit). The UK is a rather particular context for this word, where it mainly means autonomy (in whatever form) regarding England.

Regarding this definition (or the one by the Encyclopedia Britannica if you want it more thorough), if there are positive aspects to this ideology, they either translate to those other notions I mentioned above, or they are something of the past. Today's nationalism, as a political ideology - and especially in our modern globalized world - is in my opinion a despicable ideology, for all the racism, discrimination, superiority feeling, inequalities, apartheid, uniform culture etc. etc. that it induces. If this is the simplistic route, then I take it without hesitation.

A positive alternative? Humanism, I guess.

Edited by suitkees - April 13 2021 at 01:34

It’s not realistic to say “no borders, no countries.” It’s like saying you prefer to have no name and have no body. Well, you have a name and you have a body, whether you like it or not. It’s called being alive.

Edited by Crane - April 12 2021 at 19:58

I'm not sure but i'm finding it more awkward these days to include "antidisestablishmentarianism" into a casual conversation.