Explaining the World to US Nationalists

[Common Sense]

Democrats used to be nationalists so....

...and Republicans used to be big government liberals, so...

[Peter1469]

OK, then you define the differences between patriotism and nationalism.

Nationalism and Patriotism are two terms that show differences between them even though both of them are concerned with individual relationships towards nations. Nationalism consists in showing interest in the unification of a nation based on cultural and linguistic equanimity. On the other hand patriotism consists in developing love for a nation based on its values and beliefs. This is the major difference between nationalism and patriotism.

[Refugee]

Nationalism certainly incorporates patriotism, but it goes further. Nationalism includes uniqueness a special standing apart from others, a superiority. When you sing the national anthem there’s nothing in their about exporting ‘freedom’ to others, or the American Eagle flying over the mountains of others. That’s because the anthem is patriotic, not nationalist. Compare the anthem to this load of nationalistic nonsense and that’s the difference.

This is nationalism.
‘Over here, USA,
Over there, USA,
Freedom and liberty everywhere …’

It’s not specific to America and echo’s itself throughout history as nationalist countries headed off to control others. For various differing reason, the Dutch, French, British, Germans and Russians have all had a go. If countries won’t uphold the dollar, then the next best thing is to control the world’s oil supply, or install puppet governments that will do it. The various excuses are bringing freedom, policing, regime change, removing dictators … but underlying it all is control of an indispensable economic resource.

[Hoosier8]

...and Republicans used to be big government liberals, so...

Republicans were nationalists also. Dems have abandoned American values for European values.

[Peter1469]

In the most simplest terms, patriotism is simply love and devotion to ones country. Nationalism is the belief that your nation is superior to others.

That is not a required component of nationalism.

[Chris]

Republicans were nationalists also. Dems have abandoned American values for European values.

At one time Reps were more progressive and Dems more free market, but they reversed economic positions in the late 1800s. That much is true. See Rothbard's The Progressive Era.

Common Sense makes it up that the reversal extended to other aspects of the parties, even unto Reps were once liberal and Dems once conservative, and this latest about big government.

[carolina73]

Nationalism is portrayed by all countries at the Olympics, World Cup and other events. It means that you are proud of your country, what it represents and it's history.
Patriotism is really a more militaristic word. You are not a Patriot if you are not ready to defend your country or sacrifice for it.

Equating Nationalism with some view of people taking over other countries like the left wing Hitler did is the incorrect use of the word. It reminds me of people that confuse preference with prejudice.

[Refugee]

[FONT="]Nationalism and Patriotism are two terms that show differences between them even though both of them are concerned with individual relationships towards nations. Nationalism consists in showing interest in the unification of a nation based on cultural and linguistic equanimity. On the other hand patriotism consists in developing love for a nation based on its values and beliefs. This is the major difference between nationalism and patriotism.[/FONT]

What third-party did you get that quote from Peter?

Nationalism incorporates patriotism, aspects of which include a shared culture and language. Nationalism goes further and seeks to impose its values on others. Bringing ‘freedom’, regime changes and sanctions are all part of nationalism. Patriotism is internal, nationalism is external.
You don’t need third party quotes or a dictionary. I’ll explain it all in simple to understand terms, with lots of pictures.

[Refugee]

Nationalism is portrayed by all countries at the Olympics, World Cup and other events. It means that you are proud of your country, what it represents and it's history.
Patriotism is really a more militaristic word. You are not a Patriot if you are not ready to defend your country or sacrifice for it.

Equating Nationalism with some view of people taking over other countries like the left wing Hitler did is the incorrect use of the word. It reminds me of people that confuse preference with prejudice.

You’re getting your patriotism mixed up with nationalism, Carolina.
Certainly, patriotism would include defending one’s own country, but not attacking others.
Hitler too was a nationalist, just like Trump. He too invaded other countries although for different reasons, but also saw Germany as superior to others.

[MMC]

At one time Reps were more progressive and Dems more free market, but they reversed economic positions in the late 1800s. That much is true. See Rothbard's The Progressive Era.

Common Sense makes it up that the reversal extended to other aspects of the parties, even unto Reps were once liberal and Dems once conservative, and this latest about big government.

But this does not mean that parochialism itself is bad, and some philosophers who hold the constrained view of human nature have offered a principled defense of it. Burke, also in his Reflections, noted the moral benefits of local attachments and the moral depravity of those who shun them:

To be attached to the subdivision, to love the little platoon we belong to in society, is the first principle (the germ as it were) of public affections. It is the first link in the series by which we proceed towards a love to our country, and to mankind. The interest of that portion of social arrangement is a trust in the hands of all those who compose it; and as none but bad men would justify it in abuse, none but traitors would barter it away for their own personal advantage.[10]

Burke noted that “turbulent, discontented men of quality” who are “puffed up with personal pride and arrogance, generally despise their own order.”



Adam Smith offered a similar argument that parochialism and local commitments more generally are good things because they cause people to apply themselves in ways that can do the most good:

That wisdom which contrived the system of human affections . . . seems to have judged that the interest of the great society of mankind would be best promoted by directing the principal attention of each individual to that particular portion of it, which was most within the sphere both of his abilities and of his understanding.[11]

Burke and Smith are each offering a moral justification for parochialism—for caring more about those close to you than those far away. Burke and Smith doubted that people freed from local commitments and parochial identities would work as hard or care as much about distant others......snip~


Its not surprising. But then those that can read and comprehend.....don't! Hence always looking for equivalency.