To what extent is Nationalism a progressive ideology?
The first argument in paragraph one is to discuss is what nationalism is, to look at different categories of nationalism and expand on details of those concepts under such headings . Then, in the middle section the idea is to examine evidence of a progressive ideology within nationalism. Lastly, by means of a summary, it is necessary to correlate those two concepts, comparing and contrasting them to define a conclusion as to how far they are related or not related to one another.
So, in terms of defining the concept of nationalism, the concepts of nation, civic nationalism, liberal nationalism and socialist nationalism are important. To define nationalism we need to examine the idea of the nation to which it pertains; a nation can be defined by a unified entity or group of people who share the same qualities, such as ethnicity, and language, with a right to self determination i.e. being capable of self governance. Exclusive nationalists would argue in favour of racial or cultural nationalism. That is when these traits and similarities of a nation are apparent in the genetic likeness of it’s people or common language for example Brexit creating a heightened sense of white British cultural identity whereas inclusive nationalists feel the opposite namely that one can originate from anywhere and still feel the same sense of belonging to a host nation for example in which they reside. A nation is also a nation state in charge of it’s own economy and itself. So, nationalism might pertain to a feeling of political nationhood based on emotional ties between its people who share a common set of societal or political values as first discussed by Rousseau (1712-78) to describe the sense of unity and belonging behind the French revolution. This is also known as a civic nationalism. This can be linked to racial or cultural radicalism manifesting itself in the rights of ethnic minorities within a country to self determination such as the Kurds in northern Iraq. Internationalism relates to the socialist nationalist principle behind the idea that the whole world should be united behind the common goal of furthering an interest in human society, some forms of nationalism pertain to this perspective and others don’t. The EU and UN in which all participating nations are members of a larger federation or conglomerate are that. In particular, in the case of the EU states are equal partners with the right to political vetoing of decision making. Irish nationalism by contrast focussed on the rights of Northern Irish citizens to live in their own homes in an Irish Free State and was concerned with the rights of that group on an exclusive basis.
In the second paragraph we are going to discuss the following concepts of liberal, conservative, anti or post colonial amen expansionist nationalism. Firstly, liberal nationalism is strongly associated with the idea of internationalism. In examples such as Woodrow Wilson’s 14 points after WWI and Nehru demanding independence in India liberal nationalism is seen as both rational and progressive in an attempt to allow nations to co exist peacefully having endured such great hardship and sacrifice. It focuses on the idea of working together for the progression of trade an mitigating circumstances that lead to military conflict in the formation of organisations such ask the UN and EU. Great thinkers in this dept include Johann Gottfried von Herder (1744-1803) who coined the phrase Volksgeist or spirit of the people to renationalise Germany and galvanise all it’s city states back into one under Prussian rule after the sectarian wars of Germany’s reformation. This was a lighter and more positive version of what what led to Hitler’s notion of expansionism. It was essentially defensive based. France was unified and had an empire and Germany’s neighbour and had expansionist aims towards colonising the German speaking area under Napoleon. It ultimately led to the 1815 revolution which failed after the defeat of Napoleon and ultimately led to German unity in Germany’s second empire, the Prussian empire of the 1850s. One of it’s most famous campaign songs was Die Gedanken Sind Frei; All Thoughts are Free, a translation of the first verse is such;
All thoughts are free
Who can but solve them?
They fly by like shadows in the night
No-one can know them
No huntsman shoot them dead
With powder and lead
All thoughts are free.
Meaning that first attempt at revolution had failed but would ultimately succeed. Giussppe Mazzini (1805-1872) did the same for Italian nationalism and it succeeded between 1848-1870.
Conservative nationalism was born of the 80s and the West’s need to end the stand off of the Cold War. It belongs to the politics of former American Actor Ronald Reagan and Margaret Thatcher the British prime minister. Thatcher won the nations heart with her own form of interventionism in defeating the socialist leaning Argentinian state in the Falklands War which was an enormous gamble and was won on the toss of a coin. The UK actually lost and the Argentinians surrendered to us first when we went to surrender to them at the decisive battle of Goose Green. It was that pure chance that decisive won the cold war for the west it made the cohesion Thatcher stood for possible. The UK rallied behind the idea of cooperating with her policies for a better future winning the ensuing election which they were set to lose she was so unpopular at first after the Broadwater Farm Riots in Brixton. Maintaining order and discipline and defending traditional British values and institutions took prominence. It’s sometimes known as Neo nationalism when the emphasis prior tot that had been dominated by internationalist sentiments in European co-operation by operators such as Konrad Adenauer the first post War German chancellor who I would define as a liberal or civic nationalist. Stability and social glue was also a trait of Charles de Gaulle time as French President after WWII, though cooperating to form the EU his stance was decisively more pro proudly French and less about atonement for past crimes. It certainly wasn’t using the German sense of discipline for the greater good of all in Europe in order to create an economic miracle like Adenauer.
Adenauer saw the future of German nationalism and it’s survival in combining it in economic federalism for for the greater good of Europe and thus increasing and maintain Germany’s soft power and influence. According to his son’s wife whom I met in 2006, he was a deeply religious man and it came from a divine inspiration in picking up a molten candlestick from the ruins of the Gestapo HQ in Cologne where his second wife died of torture related blood poisoning. He saw it as a ‘beautifully German’ object that was ‘distorted’ by the greed of the Nazis of not wanting to ‘share German discipline and talent’ with others, but hoard all the spoils of it for themselves. Thatcher opposed this view. Many of her lot saw it as a will to continue Hitler’s sentiment and values of a united Europe under a German flag as a democracy and not a dictatorship. Knowing his family personally though I see that as a very harsh and cynical stance to take as he was a deeply Christian man influenced by his Kartellverband or German Cartel Association’s masonic mission statement I used to share of Friendship! Religion! Academia! That I would attribute to Heidelberg University liberalism of the 1870s. So it’s a will to share the positive and beautiful side of German nature as atonement for the crime of the holocaust to replace Herman Goring with JS Bach in this sense. It was also a form of progressive nationalism. Some of the political groups connected with this political influence such as the French National Front and the British national party can be inward looking regressive and sinister. This form of nationalism is often romanticised and can lead to more extreme forms of nationalism taking root. Ultimate thinkers in this category include Charles Maurras (1868-1952) who engaged in a a revolutionary movement called Action Francaise being monarchist, counter revolutionary and anti parliamentary under the guise that ‘a true nationalist places his country above everything’. Some consider the views extreme and fascist in sentiment.
Then there is expansive or chauvinistic nationalism that pertains to the concept of conquering other nations and subsuming them into their rule ultimately enslaving their people and or treating them as second class citizens relative to your own examples of this include the roman empire, the British and Spanish empires of the 19th century and the attempt of the Nazis to create a 3rd Empire. It rejects the rights of others to self determination.
Then there is postcolonial nationalism which is the ultimate rejection of the aforementioned values of throwing the colonists out of your country. Expansionism at first was often seen of as having been connected with economic greed. Post-colonialism in parts of Africa such a Mugabe in Zimbabwe and the Mau Mau in Kenya in the late part of the 20th century for example. It is often seen of traditionally as anti western, anti capitalist and pro socialist such as the Chinese revolution or the Vietnam war. Thinkers in this dept including Marcus Garvey of Birkbeck college London form 1887-1940 who conceived the idea of Black Nationalism that lead to the developments in 20th Century US race relations such as Malcolm X and the black panthers who believed black citizens were ‘better than the white man’.
All in all to conclude if nationalism is truly progressive I feel that it is on balance. It’s less conservative and ultimately driven by a will for that nationalistic sentiment to prevail over tolerance even at the expense of instability being part of society and intolerance towards outsiders such as refugees as we are currently witnessing in the UK with Nigel Farage, but why should people from outside be favoured over the indigenous population?
Let’s give an example from Germany. In Chemnitz in Saxony there was a riot in which some people were killed at a city festival. It seemed that a lot of refugees had recently been placed in the local community. Their sons and daughters needed partners. If they had German partners they could stay forever. The thing was that in the early 90s the native Saxon male population lost many Saxon women to Western men after reunification. Why? Becuase they got better grades than the men and went to univeristies in Western Europe. My own ex was one of them. Many Saxon men had to live with a life without a partner as a consequence for at least 30 years as it offset the male/female demographics of the local population.
It’s just that the young intake proved to be extra competition for the girls and they are really beatuiful the Saxon women. They were defending them from the heart, even though it’s a right wing thing to do and extremely male because in my experience of living abroad the women are more welcoming than the men in terms of why you are there.
Indeed, I felt this myself as an economic migrant myself in Germany. That I was being favoured over some of the local population however respectful I was of them and wanted to help. I had a skill in English language that was in demand and I had work and many people in the post industrial city of Wuppertal where I lived had been on the dole their whole lives. They’d left school at 14 with no hope of anything better. Why should I be allowed their work and their women as a foreigner? There is some evidence from Poland to suggest that societies that are more ethnically homogenous are ultimately happier and it’s not just about economics as previously thought. That said if my church is anything to go by these behaviours aren’t necessarily genetic; tolerance of other races can be learned via education such as in Christian religion. My church C3 Colchester is both happy and multicultural.